This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Code formatting [Re: [patch] s390*: watchpoints regression [repost]]
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- Cc: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com, brobecker at adacore dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, pedro at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 18:52:30 +0200
- Subject: Re: Code formatting [Re: [patch] s390*: watchpoints regression [repost]]
- References: <20111218115931.GA22952@host2.jankratochvil.net> <201112181352.pBIDq9D0023292@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:52:09 +0100 (CET)
> From: Mark Kettenis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> CC: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
> > > if ([...])
> > > /* This is a comment that ... */
> > > return;
> > This is a bug from the first sight as there are two C statements attached to
> > an `if' conditional. Two statements always need a block. This is a bug.
> > I really do not have time to interrupt myself each time, several times
> > a minute, looking at the code starting examining what those two statements
> > semantically are, and therefore if they really require a block or not.
> I agree with Jan here.
Any reasons why no one says anything about the alternative I
suggested? AFAIU, it is free from all the disadvantages mentioned