leandrof/linux
1
0
Fork 0
forked from Minki/linux
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Revert "docs: checkpatch: add UNNECESSARY/UNSPECIFIED_INT and UNNECESSARY_ELSE"

Browse Source 
This reverts commit cbb817fc2e.

Late-arriving nacks make it clear that I applied this one too soon.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAKXUXMzEFQd1JJhx4ZbBQiuSB7Fk3bd7dwJYmPOvEtMqZopxpg@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
This commit is contained in:
Jonathan Corbet 2021-10-04 17:12:56 -06:00
parent b718f9d919
commit b19511926c
1 changed files with 0 additions and 47 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

47
Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
View File

@ -999,13 +999,6 @@ Functions and Variables
return bar;
**UNNECESSARY_INT**
int used after short, long and long long is unnecessary. So remove it.
**UNSPECIFIED_INT**
Kernel style prefers "unsigned int <foo>" over "unsigned <foo>" and
"signed int <foo>" over "signed <foo>".
Permissions
-----------
@ -1254,43 +1247,3 @@ Others
**TYPO_SPELLING**
Some words may have been misspelled. Consider reviewing them.
**UNNECESSARY_ELSE**
Using an else statement just after a return or a break statement is
unnecassary. For example::
for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
int foo = bar();
if (foo < 1)
break;
else
usleep(1);
}
is generally better written as::
for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
int foo = bar();
if (foo < 1)
break;
usleep(1);
}
So remove the else statement. But suppose if a if-else statement each
with a single return statement, like::
if (foo)
return bar;
else
return baz;
then by removing the else statement::
if (foo)
return bar;
return baz;
their is no significant increase in the readability and one can argue
that the first form is more readable because of indentation, so for
such cases do not convert the existing code from first form to second
form or vice-versa.