DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>,
	John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
	Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>,
	Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>,
	Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
	Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>,
	Gagandeep Singh <g.singh@nxp.com>,
	Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
	Sachin Saxena <sachin.saxena@nxp.com>,
	Harini Ramakrishnan <harini.ramakrishnan@microsoft.com>,
	Omar Cardona <ocardona@microsoft.com>,
	Pallavi Kadam <pallavi.kadam@intel.com>,
	Ranjit Menon <ranjit.menon@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] devtools: forbid variable declaration inside for
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 17:12:32 +0100
Message-ID: <1776915.IobQ9Gjlxr@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200323135919.GA1517@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

23/03/2020 14:59, Bruce Richardson:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:26:54PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > Some compilers raise an error when declaring a variable
> > in the middle of a function. This is a C99 allowance.
> > Even if DPDK switches globally to C99 or C11 standard,
> > the coding rules are for declarations at the beginning
> > of a block:
> > http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/coding_style.html#local-variables
> > 
> > This coding style is enforced by adding a check of
> > the common patterns like "for (int i;"
> > 
> 
> Could we, or should we, not also revisit the coding standards for this.
> Those standards are quite old now, and could do with being updated to take
> account of things like the newer C standards. Obviously for consistency
> reasons any changes should not be major, but I don't think we should view
> the guidelines as set in stone either.
> 
> For this particular issue, I think generally having all declarations at the
> beginning of a block is the right thing to do, however, I would support
> relaxing this rule in a couple of scenarios, specifically:
> 
> * declaring a variable like i in a for loop, i.e. the case above
> * using const on a variable declaration, marking it as const at first
>   assignment [because I take the view that increased use of const is almost
>   always a good thing]

I would tend to agree in general for updating guidelines,
and especially in this case.
But because we are not enforcing C99 (or C11) when compiling,
some users are still trying to compile with old compilers.
As a result, a declaration in a for loop will break compilation
with some compilers:
	http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=bc3282125b

I am OK either way:
	- switch globally to C99/C11
	- or forbid declaration in for loop
I took the second option because it is easier,
and because it maximizes our compiler tolerance.



  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-23 16:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-17 22:26 Thomas Monjalon
2020-03-23 13:40 ` David Marchand
2020-03-23 13:47   ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-03-23 13:59 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-03-23 16:12   ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2020-05-24 17:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-24 18:30   ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-05-28 12:30   ` David Marchand
2020-07-03  9:08     ` David Marchand

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=1776915.IobQ9Gjlxr@xps \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=g.singh@nxp.com \
    --cc=harini.ramakrishnan@microsoft.com \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
    --cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \
    --cc=matan@mellanox.com \
    --cc=ocardona@microsoft.com \
    --cc=pallavi.kadam@intel.com \
    --cc=ranjit.menon@intel.com \
    --cc=sachin.saxena@nxp.com \
    --cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
    --cc=viacheslavo@mellanox.com \
    --cc=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
    /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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git