On Mon, 11 Oct 2010, Igor Grinberg wrote:
> >> - for (i = 0; i< ARRAY_SIZE(ulpi_ids); i++)
> >> - if (ulpi_ids[i] == ULPI_ID(vid, pid))
> >> + for (i = 0; i< ARRAY_SIZE(ulpi_ids); i++) {
> >> + if (ulpi_ids[i].id == ULPI_ID(vid, pid)) {
> >> + pr_info("Found %s ULPI transceiver.\n",
> >> + ulpi_ids[i].name);
> >> break;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >
> > Note that {} for the loop are not necessary.
>
> Correct.
> Though I think it improves the readability, because the statement in the loop
> is a compound statement, but Documentation/CodingStyle says to get rid
> of those, while making no difference between simple and compound statements.
> I'll wait for some other comments (if any) and then repost.
For what it's worth, I agree. The guidelines in
Documentation/CodingStyle are not meant to be cast in stone as "the
only way to do it". Linus has said many times that overall readability
is more important.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
