On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 1:04 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 11:52 AM Wilczynski, Michal > <michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 6/29/2023 6:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 6:51 PM Michal Wilczynski > > > <michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> Currently terminator line contains redunant characters. > > > Well, they are terminating the list properly AFAICS, so they aren't > > > redundant and the size of it before and after the change is actually > > > the same, isn't it? > > > > This syntax is correct of course, but we have an internal guidelines specifically > > saying that terminator line should NOT contain a comma at the end. Justification: > > > > "Terminator line is established for the data structure arrays which may have unknown, > > to the caller, sizes. The purpose of it is to stop iteration over an array and avoid > > out-of-boundary access. Nevertheless, we may apply a bit more stricter rule to avoid > > potential, but unlike, event of adding the entry after terminator, already at compile time. > > This will be achieved by not putting comma at the end of terminator line" > > This certainly applies to any new code. > > The existing code, however, is what it is and the question is how much > of an improvement the given change makes. > > So yes, it may not follow the current rules for new code, but then it > may not be worth changing to follow these rules anyway. This is a bit like housing in a city. Usually, there are strict requirements that must be followed while constructing a new building, but existing buildings are not reconstructed to follow them in the majority of cases. It may not even be a good idea to do that.
