[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