rtems/src/scheduler* code convention issue

[Sebastian Huber]

On 2014-05-28 17:43, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>> We still have no new rule for "avoidance of deep nesting by using early
>> >returns" in the wiki page.  So we are still in the situation that everyone
>> >interested in code contributions must deduce this rule himself from the
>> >"almost 200 API calls which take object ID and have the _Object_Get()
>> >switch".
>> >
> My vote is to limit nesting to 4 levels of indentation. Early returns
> or local goto to error/out label should be used when it makes sense.
> For example:
> int foo(int bar)
> {
>    int a = 0; // one level
>    if ( bar == a ) {
>      int b = 1; // two levels
>      while ( a++ < b ) {
>        int c = 2; // three levels
>        if ( a == c ) {
>          goto err; // fourth and deepest level!
>        }
>      }
>    }
>    return 0;
> err:
>    return -1;
> }
>

For the cpukit the coding style should enforce that new/changed code looks 
similar enough to the exiting code.  I really don't care how particular rules 
look like since you can find for every rule an arbitrary amount of pros and 
cons.  I think however that it is very important that the rules in charge are 
documented.  I should be possible to give newcomers a document that describes 
the coding style in detail.  It can also be used to judge code contributions.

A "avoidance of deep nesting by using early returns" rule should cover what 
happens if it leads to duplicated clean up code.

-- 
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.