On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:20:43PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 20:13 -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 08:16:12PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > > >> + for (row = 0; row < ckdev->rows; row++) { > > >> + if (cros_ec_keyb_row_has_ghosting(ckdev, buf, row)) > > >> + return true; > > >> + } > > > > > > No need for curly braces here. I would not care if not for below. > > > > OK I dont't think I even knew about that rule. Actually, what is that rule? > > There is no rule, uses with and without braces > exist in about similar numbers in the kernel. > > Both are used ~2000 times. > > Newer uses more commonly have braces and I think > using braces is a better style. I consider this example of a single statement body (albeit nested) and therefore no braces are necessary, as mentioned in out coding style. Thanks. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html