From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51404 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OnGrd-0006KQ-DO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:09:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OnGrc-0007d3-CC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:09:57 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30546) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OnGrc-0007cy-2o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 16:09:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4C71840B.7040409@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 23:09:47 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] CODING_STYLE amendments References: <4C6A4291.1020105@redhat.com> <4C6A8CD8.2080701@codemonkey.ws> <4C71550F.6080602@redhat.com> <4C716F43.8070805@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: Jes Sorensen , Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho , Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel On 08/22/2010 09:56 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: > >> Can someone point to a bug in QEMU that's been caused because of >> CODING_STYLE or the fact that some patches don't adhere to it? > 7b1df88f284f462ecb236931ad863a815f243195 How was this bug caused by CODING_STYLE? In fact, if CODING_STYLE was applied correctly then this bug would stand out much more: if (...) { /* .... */; } return; or be completely eliminated: if (...) { /* .... */; return; } -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.