Subject: Re: commoning up code that changes uids and gids
To: David Laight <email@example.com>
From: Luke Mewburn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/08/2003 18:20:57
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 10:13:16PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
| > I didn't think that foo(->)bar or vec() or stu(.)pid were
| > valid syntax, actually...
| > Obviously I'm somehow worng.
| ok, but (foo)->bar, (vec) and (vec)[(9)] are valid...
| So are 9[vec], and 9["abcdefghi"] :-)
| > I tend to modify code in the fashion in which it is presented to me.
| > What I do when I write code will probably vary because everyone has
| > their own favourite style...
| True, If I modify code as far as rewriting it, it will pick up my style.
Except that in NetBSD we have a source code style code, which may be
New code written by NetBSD developers and committed to our tree is
expected to adhere to that.
In the specific case of the issue that this thread is relating to
(the use of parenthesis), the style guide calls for the use of
parenthesis if the code in question is confusing without them.
More than one developer has commented that they would like to see
the extra parenthesis there, so let's just add them, reduce confusion,
and stop grandstanding over whose memory of operator(7) is more
functional at 4am without enough sleep ;-) ;-)
| But committing blatant style changes could lead to a commit war.
No they wont, because we (the developers, as well as email@example.com)
do not tolerate commit wars.