Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 20:54:06 -0700 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/cfe cfe_console.c Message-ID: <48DEFFDE.5020300@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200809280333.m8S3XABp063809@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200809280333.m8S3XABp063809@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48DEFFDE.5020300>