From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 17 10:22:11 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573C01065672 for ; Sun, 17 May 2009 10:22:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stas@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mx0.deglitch.com (backbone.deglitch.com [IPv6:2001:16d8:fffb:4::abba]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0868C8FC21 for ; Sun, 17 May 2009 10:22:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stas@FreeBSD.org) Received: from DSPAM-Daemon (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0.deglitch.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C885C8FC4E for ; Sun, 17 May 2009 14:22:08 +0400 (MSD) Received: from orion.SpringDaemons.com (unknown [77.232.3.143]) by mx0.deglitch.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 875648FC18; Sun, 17 May 2009 14:22:03 +0400 (MSD) Received: from orion (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by orion.SpringDaemons.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B7A4439830; Sun, 17 May 2009 14:22:36 +0400 (MSD) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 14:22:31 +0400 From: Stanislav Sedov To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-Id: <20090517142231.2968f311.stas@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20090501.081229.1359784281.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20090430233648.GA95360@keira.kiwi-computer.com> <20090430.183727.803597558.imp@bsdimp.com> <49FA8E88.1040905@gmx.de> <20090501.081229.1359784281.imp@bsdimp.com> Organization: The FreeBSD Project X-XMPP: ssedov@jabber.ru X-Voice: +7 916 849 20 23 X-PGP-Fingerprint: F21E D6CC 5626 9609 6CE2 A385 2BF5 5993 EB26 9581 X-Mailer: carrier-pigeon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Sun May 17 14:22:08 2009 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 1.0000 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 98689409 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0023 X-DSPAM-Signature: 4a0fe550994292383363236 Cc: rick-freebsd2008@kiwi-computer.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, christoph.mallon@gmx.de Subject: Re: C99: Suggestions for style(9) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 10:22:11 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:12:29 -0600 (MDT) "M. Warner Losh" mentioned: > > This is a religious point, and we're dangerously close to saying my > religion is better than your religion. I don't like this part of the > proposal at all. I can see the value in relaxing it for when you have > a series of variables that are initialized, but relaxing it to the > point where you intermix code and declarations goes way too far. It > is bad enough to have to deal with inner scopes, but tolerable. It is > intolerable to have to look for it anywhere in a big function. It > tends to encourage spaghetti code, which is one of the things that > style(9) tries to discourage in many subtle ways. > Seconded. Furthermore, when declaring the every advanced editor supports jumping to variables declarations, Christoph ignored the point that the code gets written for people and not for compilers and editors. Last ones can live without any style at all, people can't. The thing people love about BSD code is that it is always perfectly known where to look for declarations and specific parts of the code. Strict style implies a lot of implicit knowledge, so you don't have to study a piece of code for a long time before you understand how it works in general. By relaxing style(9) we're in danger of loosing this benefit. - -- Stanislav Sedov ST4096-RIPE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEARECAAYFAkoP5WwACgkQK/VZk+smlYFocACfTzVHRpQb8H3tAeg97ljqn3bv DZ4An2iOQXXjTNWpivyHrGR3sBaeOfmJ =qz0I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- !DSPAM:4a0fe550994292383363236!