C99: Suggestions for style(9)

[Christoph Mallon]

Marius Strobl schrieb:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
>> return with parentheses:
>> Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There 
>> is no source for confusion here, so the rule even contradicts the rule, 
>> which states not to use redundant parentheses. Maybe, decades ago it was 
>> just a workaround for a broken compiler, which does not exist anymore.
> 
> FYI, the idea behind this rule is said to be to able to use
> a macro return(), f.e. for debugging you then can do:
> #define	return(x) do {							\
> 	printf("returning from %s with %d\n", __func__, (x));		\
> 	return (x);							\
> } while (0)
> 
> Given the this is a nifty feature and parentheses around the
> return value don't hurt maintainability in any way IMO this
> rule should stay.

This is mentioned nowhere in style(9) (in general it is lacking reasons 
why something is some way or the other).
Also I consider this as gross abuse: Macro names shall be in all 
uppercase, so it is clear that there is a macro at work. Therefore 
"return" is not a candidate. So this would violate yet another rule in 
style(9) (the original return already violates the no-redundant 
parentheses rule).
Also I would not mention __func__: there were objections against using 
it in the past (though I, logically, prefer its use).

	Christoph