From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA21C433ED for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 12:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC35D613C4 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 12:39:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240599AbhDFMjX convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:39:23 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:45578 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238946AbhDFMjX (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:39:23 -0400 Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C65A61380; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 12:39:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:39:13 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Yordan Karadzhov Cc: Linux Trace Devel , Sameeruddin shaik Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace-cmd: Add CODING_STYLE and CONTRIBUTE documents Message-ID: <20210406083913.7f7f6d0a@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <7ef527d0-b17e-6292-d8f5-dc730a1751aa@gmail.com> References: <20210405151959.1d6901b2@gandalf.local.home> <7ef527d0-b17e-6292-d8f5-dc730a1751aa@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-devel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 11:18:07 +0300 Yordan Karadzhov wrote: > Maybe we should include an explanation what to do in cases like this: > >         struct instance_wrapper *iw, **iw_ptr; > > > Let's say, the two are closely related in the code of the function, > however technically speaking the types are different. Is it OK to have > both on the same line? That's one of the cases where I would say it's an exception and not a rule. Remember this document is a guide not a requirement as I state at the end. I wouldn't include the above, as it's not common, and it really is a case by case situation on how to do that, so it is out of scope for this document. -- Steve