Powered by Linux
[PATCH] continue_vs_break: Fix some style issue — Semantic Matching Tool

[PATCH] continue_vs_break: Fix some style issue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Add a missing } in a comment.
Remove some unneeded {} in code, to be consistent.

Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 check_continue_vs_break.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/check_continue_vs_break.c b/check_continue_vs_break.c
index d12577e0e6d2..6c991630d3d9 100644
--- a/check_continue_vs_break.c
+++ b/check_continue_vs_break.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
  * do {
  *    if (xxx)
  *        continue;
+ * }
  * while (0);
  *
  * Then the continue is equivalent of a break.  So what was really intended?
@@ -76,9 +77,9 @@ static void match_stmt(struct statement *stmt)
 	if (stmt->type != STMT_ITERATOR)
 		return;
 
-	if (is_do_while_zero(stmt)) {
+	if (is_do_while_zero(stmt))
 		push_statement(&iterator_stack, stmt);
-	} else
+	else
 		push_statement(&iterator_stack, NULL);
 }
 
-- 
2.34.1




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Big List of Linux Books]

  Powered by Linux