From owner-cvs-all Mon Apr 1 17:18:39 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E8837B405; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 17:18:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g321IKi53189; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 18:18:20 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@village.org) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g321IJf60311; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 18:18:19 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@village.org) Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 18:16:28 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20020401.181628.15900667.imp@village.org> To: jake@locore.ca Cc: dillon@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 critical.c src/sys/i386/include cpufunc.h critical.h src/sys/i386/isa apic_vector.s icu_vector.s src/sys/kern kern_fork.c kern_proc.c kern_switch.c src/sys/alpha/alpha critical.c src/sys/alpha/include cpufunc.h ... From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20020401201130.K207@locore.ca> References: <200204012351.g31NpO890339@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020401.175136.106024419.imp@village.org> <20020401201130.K207@locore.ca> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message: <20020401201130.K207@locore.ca> Jake Burkholder writes: : Apparently, On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:51:36PM -0700, : M. Warner Losh said words to the effect of; : : > In message: <200204012351.g31NpO890339@freefall.freebsd.org> : > Matt Dillon writes: : > : Note: In general, developers should not gratuitously move declarations out : > : of sub-blocks. They are where they are for reasons of structure, grouping, : > : readability, compiler-localizability, and to avoid developer-introduced bugs : > : similar to several found in recent years in the VFS and VM code. : > : > Yes. Style(9) says don't do this unless the code is really complicated: : > : > Parts of a for loop may be left empty. Do not put declarations inside : > blocks unless the routine is unusually complicated. : > : > I suspect that the stuff you are working on is complicated enough to : > justify their use. Style(9) doesn't say never do this. : : I personally don't like it, but I think you are correct. I personally hate it too, and never use it. In most cases it argues for simpler code. However, sometimes the code isn't that easy to simplify and still have it be understandable and/or perform adequeately. It should be the exception rather than the rule. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message