[Gluster-devel] if/else coding style :-)

Shyam srangana at redhat.com
Mon Oct 13 14:13:38 UTC 2014

On 10/13/2014 10:08 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
> On 10/13/2014 07:27 PM, Shyam wrote:
>> On 10/13/2014 08:01 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
>>> hi,
>>>       Why are we moving away from this coding style?:
>>> if (x) {
>>> /*code*/
>>> } else {
>>> /* code */
>>> }
>> This patch (in master) introduces the same and explains why,
>> commit 0a8371bdfdd88e662d09def717cc0b822feb64e8
>> Author: Jeff Darcy <jdarcy at redhat.com>
>> Date:   Mon Sep 29 17:27:14 2014 -0400
>>     extras: reverse test for '}' vs. following 'else' placement
>>     The two-line form "}\nelse {" has been more common than the one-line
>>     form "} else {" in our code for years, and IMO for good reason (see
>>     the comment in the diff).
> Will there be any objections to allow the previous way of writing this
> if/else block? I just don't want to get any errors in 'check-formatting'
> when I write the old way for this.
> May be we can change it to warning?

I am going to state my experience/expectation :)

I actually got this _error_ when submitting a patch, and thought to 
myself "isn't the one-line form the right one?" then went to see why 
this check was in place and read the above. Going by the reason in the 
patch, I just adapted myself.

Now, coming to _allowing_ both forms with a warning, my personal call is 
_no_, we should allow one form so that the code is readable and there is 
little to no confusion for others on which form to use. So I would say 
no to your proposal.


More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list