On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:28:31PM +0300, Mikko Perttunen wrote: > On 09/26/2014 02:45 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: [...] > > I think a more idiomatic way to write this would be: > > > > static int > > calculate_tsensor_calibration(const struct tegra_tsensor *sensor, > > struct tsensor_shared_calibration shared, > > u32 *calib) > > If I do that, it will go over the 80 character limit by quite a few > characters, which is why I didn't use that style. Personally I'm fine with > either style. The above doesn't exceed the 80 character limit. Putting the return value and the static keyword on a separate line is a pretty common way to reduce line length. > > > >While at it, perhaps make shared a const * instead of passing it in by > >value? > > That is possible, but I'm not sure what the difference would be. Is there a > style rule forbidding by-value compound types? (Also if I change the style, > it would go over 80 characters by even more.) No it doesn't. The below fits within 80 characters per line just fine: static int calculate_tsensor_calibration(const struct tegra_tsensor *sensor, const struct tsensor_shared_calibration *shared, u32 *calib) Thierry
Attachment:
pgp5WQdLFOpCe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
