On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 10:01:43 +0200 Markus Ongyerth <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2018/April/27 04:55, Peter Hutterer wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 05:01:23PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > + int tilt; > > > + int pressure; > > > + int distance; > > > + int rotation; > > > + int slider; > > > + int wheel; > > > > can we make those bool? and ideally, rename them to has_tilt, has_pressure, > > etc. > > The bool type is a C99 feature, I haven't tested it, but the file looks like > it should be C90 compatible. > Looking at the Makefile.am/configure.ac I didn't find any -std= flag. What's > the C standard weston (clients) should follow? If you grep for it, you'll find that the weston code base uses bool in many places. The exact C standard version + which extensions has always been unclear to me though, we probably just take the compiler default, and stick to mostly what existing code does. > > > +static void > > > +destroy_tablet_pad_info(struct tablet_pad_info *info) > > > +{ > > > + struct tablet_v2_path *path; > > > + struct tablet_v2_path *tmp_path; > > > + struct tablet_pad_group_info *group; > > > + struct tablet_pad_group_info *tmp_group; > > > > nitpick: this is a case where collating the two lines would be acceptable, > > imo, i.e. struct tablet_v2_path *path, *tmp_path; > > I really dislike that syntax, and when in doubt I refer to kernel guidelines > which forbids it. Unless there's a strong wish to change it, I'd prefer to > keep it as is for style reasons. I usually agree with ongy here, but Peter's suggestion makes sense to me in this case - because the variables are foo and tmp_foo, not only because they are of the same type. But that is just a personal quirk of mine. Going with separate lines is never bad, IMO. > > > + if (wl_list_empty(&seat->pads) && > > > + wl_list_empty(&seat->tablets) && > > > + wl_list_empty(&seat->tools)) { > > > > confusing indentation, imo, line up with the first wl_list_empy > > I'm not attached to the current indention style, but I'm not a fan of that > alignment. Many (un/badly -configured) viewers display tabs as 4 spaces these > days (I just notcied, so does my email client), which will align the content > with the continuating clauses since `if (` is 4 chars. > While it's not a problem for proper working environments, it's something I'd > like to avoid for times where code is read on the cgit (not sure how that's > configured) or github. > I'll take a look at other files in the repository and how it's done there. All existing code (99%?) in Weston uses the line-up Peter asked for, as does the coding style doc. We rely heavily on tab stops being strictly at columns divisible by 8. Thanks, pq
pgplC8nv9R8BR.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
