Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 18:02:54 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, <arch@FreeBSD.ORG>, Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Subject: Re: Style Wars Message-ID: <20010930175137.T70218-100000@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010928165401.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
> I'm think 1b) is the one most people have favored so far and it is rather close
> to our existing style, so it's not that big of a change. Does anyone object to
> 1b)? It basically results in the following changes: use 2 tab spaces instead
> of 1 for type names, put the entire type name before the tab(s), and if the
> type is too long, just use a space.
>
> > 1b)
> >
> > struct foo {
> > int f_type;
> > struct mtx f_lock;
> > const char *f_name;
> > volatile int f_int;
> > u_int64_t f_64;
> > const volatile char f_cv;
> > TAILQ_ENTRY(foo) f_link;
> > };
Yes, this is essentially just the current style with encouragement for
more verboseness. It's interesting that indent(1) defaults to the
too-large indent of 16 (-di16). I wouldn't want to go back to that
:-). I prefer to use 1 space after the typename, but for FreeBSD I
don't mind using 1 tab after short typenames.
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010930175137.T70218-100000>