From: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>
To: "Gcc Patch List" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"Martin Liška" <mliska@suse.cz>
Subject: [PATCH/coding style] clarify pointers and operators
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 17:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6bce0b3a-0b0d-f03f-5f92-e00156e63629@gmail.com> (raw)
Martin suggested we update the Coding Conventions to describe
the expected style for function declarations with a pointer
return types, and for overloaded operators. Below is the patch.
As an aside, regarding the space convention in casts: a crude
grep search yields about 10,000 instances of the "(type)x" kinds
of casts in GCC sources and 40,000 of the preferred "(type) x"
style with the space. That's a consistency of only 80%. Is
it worth documenting a preference for a convention that's so
inconsistently followed?
Martin
Index: htdocs/codingconventions.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/codingconventions.html,v
retrieving revision 1.85
diff -u -r1.85 codingconventions.html
--- htdocs/codingconventions.html 30 Sep 2018 14:38:46 -0000 1.85
+++ htdocs/codingconventions.html 26 Nov 2018 17:59:21 -0000
@@ -803,12 +803,17 @@
<td><code>- x</code></td>
</tr><tr>
<td class="left">cast</td>
- <td class="right"><code>(foo) x</code></td>
- <td><code>(foo)x</code></td>
+ <td class="right"><code>(type) x</code></td>
+ <td><code>(type)x</code></td>
</tr><tr>
- <td class="left">pointer dereference</td>
- <td class="right"><code>*x</code></td>
- <td><code>* x</code></td>
+ <td class="left">pointer cast</td>
+ <td class="right"><code>(type *) x</code></td>
+ <td><code>(type*)x</code></td>
+</tr>
+</tr><tr>
+ <td class="left">pointer return type</td>
+ <td class="right"><code>type *f (void)</code></td>
+ <td><code>type* f (void)</code></td>
</tr>
</table>
@@ -992,6 +997,21 @@
<a href="codingrationale.html#overoper">Rationale and Discussion</a>
</p>
+<p>
+Note: in declarations of operator functions or in invocations of
+such functions that involve the keyword <code>operator</code>
+the full name of the operator should be considered as including
+the keyword with no spaces in between the keyowrd and the operator
+token. Thus, the expected format of a declaration of an operator
+is<pre>
+ T &operator== (const T & const T &);
+</pre>
+and not for example<pre>
+ T &operator == (const T & const T &);
+</pre>
+(with the space between <code>operator</code> and <code>==</code>).
+</p>
+
<h4 id="Default">Default Arguments</h4>
next reply other threads:[~2018-11-26 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-26 17:59 Martin Sebor [this message]
2018-11-26 20:41 ` Jeff Law
2018-11-27 18:46 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-11-27 22:44 ` Jeff Law
2018-11-27 12:50 ` Martin Liška
2018-11-27 12:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-11-27 16:11 ` Martin Sebor
2018-11-28 5:20 ` Sandra Loosemore
2018-11-28 23:40 ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-05 10:05 ` Richard Sandiford
2018-12-05 17:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-12-05 18:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-12-05 18:04 ` Martin Sebor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6bce0b3a-0b0d-f03f-5f92-e00156e63629@gmail.com \
--to=msebor@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=mliska@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).