From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 28 04:12:39 2008
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89EA10656A1;
	Sun, 28 Sep 2008 04:12:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F4A8FC2F;
	Sun, 28 Sep 2008 04:12:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8S4A9cC053274;
	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:10:09 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 22:10:59 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20080927.221059.-108809907.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: cperciva@freebsd.org
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <48DEFFDE.5020300@freebsd.org>
References: <200809280333.m8S3XABp063809@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<48DEFFDE.5020300@freebsd.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
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 <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 04:12:40 -0000

In message: <48DEFFDE.5020300@freebsd.org>
            Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> writes:
: 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.

I think this is a good change.

I do it in my code because I got used to it when tools enforced it
years ago...  I like it, but I'm sure others will differ.

Warner