On Sep 25, 2013 7:14 AM, "Tanu Kaskinen" <tanu.kaskinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 14:46 -0300, Jo?o Paulo Rechi Vita wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Tanu Kaskinen > > <tanu.kaskinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > It seems that at least a mass conversion the current code base to the > > > new style is getting quite a lot of opposition, so that's probably not > > > going to happen. Then there's the question that should we keep > > > complaining about style violations with the curly braces. Should > > > contributors be allowed to put the curly braces where they want, and > > > inconsistencies would be fixed later if the lines in question are > > > modified as part of some other patch? The curly brace issue is such that > > > inconsistency wouldn't bother me much. > > > > > > > As said before, I think we should avoid coding style fixes as much as > > possible, and the only way to do that is stick to our coding style as > > much as possible in new patches. For the points that are already > > inconsistent IMO the should be fixed when the inconsistent lines are > > changed as part of a patch that actually does something. > > What's your opinion regarding should we complain about the curly braces > or not? If we complain about them, then the rule should be added to the > coding style document. If we don't complain, then it's up to the person > who applies the patch to fix the style, which is less effective (it's > easy to forget or to not bother to fix the formatting before pushing the > patch). > Yes, I think we should complain about curly braces in the wrong place. IMO the "good function" example in the coding style document is clear enough, but since there were some doubts about where to put the curly braces I'm probably wrong. I can add it to the document if we come to a consensus. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/attachments/20130925/464e33b6/attachment.html>
