2008/12/15 Michael Niedermayer <michaelni@gmx.at>:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:03:03PM +0000, Robert Swain wrote:
2008/12/15 Diego Biurrun <diego@biurrun.de>:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:13:11PM +0100, Benjamin Larsson wrote:
Robert Swain wrote:
2008/12/15 Robert Swain <robert.swain@gmail.com>:
2008/12/15 diego <subversion@mplayerhq.hu>:
> Log: > K&R function declaration and whitespace cosmetics > > --- amr/amrnbdec.c (original) > +++ amr/amrnbdec.c Mon Dec 15 11:13:50 2008 > @@ -126,8 +126,9 @@ static int amrnb_decode_init(AVCodecCont > > -enum Mode decode_bitstream(AVCodecContext *avctx, uint8_t *buf, int buf_size, enum Mode *speech_mode) { > - > +enum Mode decode_bitstream(AVCodecContext *avctx, uint8_t *buf, int buf_size, > + enum Mode *speech_mode) > +{ > Urgh. I'm happy with the line breaks but I don't tend to like the opening { on a new line. I thought that was a GNU thing not a K&R thing.
Nope, it is K&R. Hmm, then who likes them on the same line other than me? :)
I do, it is more readable to me. More code per loc.
With that kind of reasoning, we can also prefer
if (condition) statement;
over
if (condition) statement
and similar.
But this discussion is completely pointless IMO. The rules have been set in http://ffmpeg.org/general.html#SEC24:
Indent size is 4. The presentation is the one specified by 'indent -i4 -kr -nut'. The TAB character is forbidden outside of Makefiles as is any form of trailing whitespace.
Now it's clear that each person will dislike some part of K&R style and prefer to do things in other ways. But the nature of compromises is exactly that: You accept a few things you may not be terribly fond of and you get a uniform style in exchange.
Mmm. There are a fair few instances of { being on the same line as the function declaration so I guess you'll have to do those too. I still don't like it but it is personal preference and if that's what's been agreed, I won't argue about something like this.
If it hadn't been agreed project-wide, I would have preferred to have been consulted about the changes before they were committed considering it's my code. Even if I haven't touched it for a while, I am still active.
i dont remember { placement for functions being discussed or agreed upon.
I think if K&R style was agreed upon then this issue is a subset of that style and so was agreed upon.
and i prefer them on the same line as well. Though i am not strongly opposed to following K&R, just that if most people prefer them like we do, that following K&R just because of it would be silly.
Seems reasonable.
Also i think that code should not be reformatted against the maintainers wishes.
I felt a bit like this after the change was made, but this would lead to inconsistency of style. Whether consistency of style is paramount or not, I don't know. Rob