A common sense improvement. Reviewed-by: Claudio Fontana <cfontana@xxxxxxx> On 7/25/22 15:13, Michal Privoznik wrote: > While we all understand that excessive use of ternary operator > may worsen code readability (e.g. nested, multi-line expression), > there are few cases where using it actually improves code > readability. For instance, when a function takes a long list of > arguments out of which one depends on a boolean expression, or > when formatting "yes"/"no" or "on"/"off" values based on a > boolean variable (although one can argue that the latter is a > subset of the former). Just consider alternatives to: > > virBufferAsprintf(buf, "<elem>%s</elem>\n", boolVar ? "yes" : "no"); > > In fact, this pattern occurs plenty in our code. Exempt if from > our "no ternary operators" rule. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > docs/coding-style.rst | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/docs/coding-style.rst b/docs/coding-style.rst > index bf0a80fbc5..038f18bda2 100644 > --- a/docs/coding-style.rst > +++ b/docs/coding-style.rst > @@ -470,7 +470,9 @@ Pointer comparisons may be shortened. All long forms are okay. > if (!foo) # or: if (foo == NULL) > > New code should avoid the ternary operator as much as possible. > -Specifically it must never span more than one line or nest: > +Specifically it must never span more than one line or nest. However, > +its usage in very basic cases is warranted (e.g. when deciding > +between two constant strings): > > :: > > @@ -481,6 +483,9 @@ Specifically it must never span more than one line or nest: > > char *foo = bar ? bar->baz ? bar->baz->foo : "nobaz" : "nobar"; > > + GOOD: > + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "<element>%s</element>\n", boolVar ? "yes" : "no"); > + > Preprocessor > ------------ >
