Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] qnum: qnum_value_is_equal() function

[Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>]

Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes:

> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:27:40AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> [...]
>> > +bool qnum_is_equal(const QObject *x, const QObject *y)
>> > +{
>> > +    const QNum *qnum_x = qobject_to(QNum, x);
>> > +    const QNum *qnum_y = qobject_to(QNum, y);
>> 
>> Humor me: blank line between declarations and statements, please.
>
> I can do it.  But why do you prefer it that way?

Habit borne out of C lacking other visual cues to distinguish
declarations and statements.

Declaration or statement?  Tell me quick, don't analyze!

    mumble(*mutter)();

This "obviously" declares @mutter as pointer to function returning
mumble.

Except when @mumble isn't a typedef name, but a function taking one
argument and returning a function that takes no argument.  Then it
passes *mutter to mumble(), and calls its return value.

The whole point of coding style is to help readers along.  Two stylistic
conventions that can help here:

1. In a function call, no space between the expression denoting the
   called function and the (parenthesized) argument list.  Elsewhere,
   space.

   So, when the example above is indeed a declaration, write it as

        mumble (*mutter)();

   If it's function calls, write it as

        mumble(*mutter)();

2. Separate declarations from statements with a blank line.  Do not mix
   them.

[...]