[PATCH] Replication patches, second try
Jeff Darcy
jdarcy at redhat.com
Tue Oct 5 19:37:02 UTC 2010
On 10/05/2010 03:01 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> I too avoid macros as much as possible, but in order
> to return NULL (and thus minimizing the changes to the
> original code), it must be a macro.
>
So do the null check inline instead of creating a macro *or* function,
and return from there. The impact on existing code is only a few lines,
and using "return" from this kind of macro is questionable anyway, so
let's avoid the issue entirely.
> For the record, I find that indenting with TABs is incompatible
> with the common (and worthwhile) don't-use-more-than-80-columns
> guideline.
I think you'll find that both Pete and I come from environments where
the two are considered quite compatible, and we're used to it. If this
were new code I might acquiesce anyway, but I'm definitely against
wholesale reformatting unless there's a very compelling reason.
More information about the iwhd-devel
mailing list