On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 06:35 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 09:40:53PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-04-17 at 21:19 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 10:38:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > + return kempld_read8(pld, index) | kempld_read8(pld, index+1) << 8; > > > > index + 1) > > > > Please > > > Wondering .... why does checkpatch not report those ? > > > > because checkpatch doesn't care about spacing around > > arithmetic as long as it's consistent. > > > > Documentation/CodingStyle doesn't say anything about > > it either. > > > Hi Joe, > > "Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators" > > doesn't apply, then ? When does it apply ? I always thought it would apply > to cases such as the above. There's a _lot_ of code that doesn't follow the "single space around binary operators" style, it's contentious, and was determined when Andy did the original checkpatch implementation to not be a valuable addition or worth the complaint pain. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
