Em Thu, 21 Oct 2021 18:31:15 +0300 Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > Hi Mauro, > > > > > + - one structure/enum member declaration per line; > > > > + - one variable declaration per line; > > > > > > Hmm, I don't mind something like: int i, j; > > > > I don't mind having things like: > > > > struct *dev, *parent_dev; > > > > or even: > > > > struct *parent_dev, *dev = pdev->dev; > > > > What it is really ugly is having multiple initialized vars at the > > same declaration, like: > > > > struct *parent_dev = pdev->dev.parent, *dev = pdev->dev; > > > > or, even worse: > > > > struct *dev = pdev->dev, *parent_dev = dev.parent; > > Cording style is one of the main candidate areas for bikeshedding. The > first question that we should answer, I believe, is whether or not we > want to define a more precise coding style for the subsystem to achieve > higher uniformity, and how much latitude we want to give to developers. I would prefer to give more freedom to developers, provided that the code is easy to read/maintain. Having to request multiple reviews just due coding style nitpicking seems to be a waste of time for everyone ;-) > For instance, I don't mind > > unsigned int i, j; > > too much, but I would scream in horror at > > char *name = dev_name, c = '\0'; Yeah, multiple vars being declared and assigned at the same line is something that should be avoided. See, even single letter vars with obvious assigns, like: int i = 0, j = 1; are less readable than: int i = 0; int j = 1; > (I'm sad C even allows declaring a char pointer and a char variable on > the same line like this). There are lots of cases between those two > extremes that are more or less good (or bad) depending on who you ask, > so we won't be able to come up with a precise set of rules that draw a > line somewhere in the middle. What we could do is err more on the side > of strictness, for instance with > > - One variable declaration per line. As an exception, grouping multiple > single-letter counter variables on a single line is allowed. > > (or even allowing no exception). This is probably stricter than it needs > to be, and in some cases it will result in a few more lines of code, but > if it brings increased readability and maintainability through > uniformity it's something we could consider. I don't think that things like: int ret, i, j; are less readable/maintainable than: int ret; int i; int j; Between the above, I would opt to the shorter format, when there's no variable initialization (no matter if the vars have single or multiple chars). On the other hand, I won't be nacking/rejecting a patch if it uses the longer format, as, for me, both are equivalent, in terms of maintenance and readability. So, for me, the rule should be just: - don't declare and initialize multiple variables at the same line. > > The same reasoning can apply to C++ comments, we can decide to allow > them or not, but the more flexibility there will be in the rules, the > less uniformity we'll have, which I personally believe hinders > readability. Yeah, agreed. Regards, Mauro
