CODING_STYLE: clarify that single-line if blocks should not be enclosed in {}

This commit is contained in:
Lennart Poettering 2014-10-22 11:09:00 +02:00
parent 03785ad0e5
commit 61f33134fc

View file

@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
- For robustness reasons, destructors should be able to destruct - For robustness reasons, destructors should be able to destruct
half-initialized objects, too half-initialized objects, too
- Error codes are returned as negative Exxx. i.e. return -EINVAL. There - Error codes are returned as negative Exxx. e.g. return -EINVAL. There
are some exceptions: for constructors, it is OK to return NULL on are some exceptions: for constructors, it is OK to return NULL on
OOM. For lookup functions, NULL is fine too for "not found". OOM. For lookup functions, NULL is fine too for "not found".
@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
doing something wrong! doing something wrong!
- Stay uniform. For example, always use "usec_t" for time - Stay uniform. For example, always use "usec_t" for time
values. Do not usec mix msec, and usec and whatnot. values. Do not mix usec and msec, and usec and whatnot.
- Make use of _cleanup_free_ and friends. It makes your code much - Make use of _cleanup_free_ and friends. It makes your code much
nicer to read! nicer to read!
@ -79,6 +79,17 @@
But it is OK if you do not. But it is OK if you do not.
- Single-line "if" blocks should not be enclosed in {}. Use this:
if (foobar)
waldo();
instead of this:
if (foobar) {
waldo();
}
- Do not write "foo ()", write "foo()". - Do not write "foo ()", write "foo()".
- Please use streq() and strneq() instead of strcmp(), strncmp() where applicable. - Please use streq() and strneq() instead of strcmp(), strncmp() where applicable.