From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 28 03:54:08 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716CA106568F for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 03:54:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cperciva@freebsd.org) Received: from xps.daemonology.net (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 52384152DA8 for ; Sun, 28 Sep 2008 03:54:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cperciva@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 3470 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2008 03:54:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO xps.daemonology.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Sep 2008 03:54:06 -0000 Message-ID: <48DEFFDE.5020300@freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 20:54:06 -0700 From: Colin Percival User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080730) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Warner Losh References: <200809280333.m8S3XABp063809@repoman.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200809280333.m8S3XABp063809@repoman.freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/cfe cfe_console.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 03:54:08 -0000 Warner Losh wrote: > Change while (cond)\n\t\t; to while (cond)\n\t\tcontinue; since the > former more explicitly tells the compiler that you want an empty loop. > There are some lint programs that use this hint to avoid generating > warnings. In style(9) the example for (p = buf; *p != '\0'; ++p) ; /* nothing */ is given, but I really like the explicit continue; enough so that I'm wondering if the example in style(9) should be changed to for (p = buf; *p != '\0'; ++p) continue; to encourage people to write that way (I hope I'm not the only person who simply never thought of adding the explicit continue?). Realizing that questions of style tend to provoke huge debates: Please send me your opinions off-list, and I'll only make this change if the emails I get are at least 75% in favour. Colin Percival