Tejun Heo wrote:
> Is this agreed upon? I tend to omit almost all unnecessary (by operator
> precedence) parenthesis, so in new EH and all other stuff, the "a && b &
> c" sort of lines are abundant. If this is something that's agreed upon,
> I can do a clean sweep over those.
More parens == easier to review. So
a && b & c
should be
a && (b & c)
to clearly delineate the separate expressions to the human eye, and also
make it clear to the reader that the '&' is intended, and not a typo
that should have been '&&'.
Anytime you see a long string of 'if' conditions, and the operators
vary, add parents for readability.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
