From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Fri Dec 4 21:09:21 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5975A41362; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:09:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from mail107.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail107.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.53]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8992714C4; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:09:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from c211-30-166-197.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au (c211-30-166-197.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.166.197]) by mail107.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4C10D4A3D2; Sat, 5 Dec 2015 07:42:19 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 07:42:18 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Bryan Drewery cc: Bruce Evans , Andrew Turner , "Kenneth D. Merry" , src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r291741 - head/sys/geom In-Reply-To: <5661E52D.6050305@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20151205064802.B4095@besplex.bde.org> References: <201512040338.tB43cZY1053263@repo.freebsd.org> <56610B6B.8010708@FreeBSD.org> <20151204233052.J2220@besplex.bde.org> <20151204125355.6712d782@bender> <20151205031713.T3286@besplex.bde.org> <5661E52D.6050305@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=PfoC/XVd c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=KA6XNC2GZCFrdESI5ZmdjQ==:117 a=PO7r1zJSAAAA:8 a=JzwRw_2MAAAA:8 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=rH8xk3a0tr3JDTjPH1AA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 21:09:21 -0000 On Fri, 4 Dec 2015, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 12/4/2015 10:03 AM, Bruce Evans wrote: >> This is specified by not giving an example of using it. style(9) was > > I really take issue with this stance. I don't think you really mean what > this implies. For example, can I even use 'x++' or mtx_lock(9) or > uintptr_t since they are not shown in an example? mtx_lock() is just another function, so it doesn't need an example any more than printf(). printf() also happens to have no example, but there is a formal rule for it an example for fprintf(). '++' is just a standard operator. style(9) happens to have an example of it, though not on a variable named x. It even has the bad example of ++p instead of p++ where the result is not used. ++p is more logical and I used to prefer it, but only p++ is KNF-normal. style(9) has even more detailed rules for uintXX_t, but no examples, and nothing for uintptr_t. uintptr_t can be considered as just another typedef. The rule about uintXX_t is mainly part of deprecating the old spelling u_intXX_t. I wouldn't trust style(9) for anything except simple formatting, but look at the subsystem(s) style. Just the top level of geom has 11000+ lines which can be considered as giving about 20 times more examples than style(9). Bruce