Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 18:46:40 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys proc.h Message-ID: <p0510100cb7d95a806546@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0109271531150.65838-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0109271531150.65838-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 3:38 PM -0700 9/27/01, Julian Elischer wrote: >Pitty: > >I think > pid_t p_oppid; /* (c + e) Save ppid in ptrace.*/ > struct vmspace *p_vmspace; /* (b) Address space. */ > u_int p_swtime; /* (j) Time swapped in or out. */ > struct itimerval p_realtimer; /* (h?/k?) Alarm timer. */ >is more readable than > > pid_t p_oppid; /* (c + e) Save ppid in ptrace.*/ > struct vmspace *p_vmspace; /* (b) Address space. */ > u_int p_swtime; /* (j) Time swapped in or out. */ > struct itimerval p_realtimer; /* (h?/k?) Alarm timer. */ When mixing a lot of structs and "shortname types" like this, I do prefer the looks of the first over the second. I guess I'd do it as "tab tab space" for non-pointers, and "tab tab asterisk" for the pointers. I can see how others might not like that, and I don't feel particularly strongly about it. But if someone were to ask for a simple-vote on the matter, I would vote for the first one (well, with the extra blank in there for non-pointers). Just my 2-cents worth. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0510100cb7d95a806546>