From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jan 28 12:54:40 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA13591 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:54:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alcanet.com.au (border.alcanet.com.au [203.62.196.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA13565 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:54:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter.jeremy@auss2.alcatel.com.au) Received: by border.alcanet.com.au id <40330>; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:44:52 +1100 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:54:18 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy Subject: Re: indent(1) and style(9) (was: btokup() macro in sys/malloc.h) To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Message-Id: <99Jan29.074452est.40330@border.alcanet.com.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Luigi Rizzo >not speaking about vinum, but to me, the indentation of 8 char and >line length of 80 chars are almost mutually exclusive. > >See e.g. tcp_input.c ip_input.c and many network device drivers as >an example -- basically all places where, for efficiency reasons, >the code tries to expand in-line various block, According to most of the coding standards I've read, readability (and hence maintainability) come before efficiency. That said, I agree that efficiency _is_ an issue within the kernel's critical paths (the TCP/IP code being one). Judicious use of inline functions (and macros) should help move code to the left - and may even make it more understandable. Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message