From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Oct 28 11:28:24 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA14399
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:28:24 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [195.8.129.26])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14390
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:28:20 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost.cybercity.dk [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00549;
	Tue, 28 Oct 1997 20:26:24 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: "Daniel Sobral" <Daniel_Sobral@voga.com.br>
cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: nullfs & current UPDATE! 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:02:15 -0300."
             <0325653E.00626440.00@papagaio.voga.com.br> 
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 20:26:22 +0100
Message-ID: <547.878066782@critter.freebsd.dk>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <0325653E.00626440.00@papagaio.voga.com.br>, "Daniel Sobral" writes:

>> > +     struct vnode *vp = ap->a_vp;
>> > +     struct null_node *xp = VTONULL(vp);
>> > +     struct vnode *lowervp = xp->null_lowervp;

>I thought that kind of variable declaration was against style(9), and
>likely to provoke anger among the smp-enlightened.

I can't see why particular the smp-cursed should care, but the general
sentiment on style(9) is that it lacks a implicit rule number zero:

	Stay in whatever style is in the file you modify.
	
--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."