Re: [RFA] Replace strdup with xstrdup in tic30-dis.c

Alan Modra
2002-11-29T05:04:17Z

On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 06:23:42PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >OK, OK. :) "typedef int bfd_boolean" it is. Plain 0 and 1 for values.
>
> You ment 0 and !0 right? :-^

Actually, having started to do the edit, I'm having second thoughts
about using plain old 0 and 1. I think I'll use FALSE and TRUE, and
#undef and #define these macros in bfd-in.h. Besides being consistent
with a "boolean" type, it means less formatting changes. Anyone
have any objections?

A whinge. This style of function declaration is a pain:

boolean function_with_a_long_name_or_lots_of_params PARAMS ((type1 arg1,
type2 arg2,
typen argn));

This is much better:

boolean function_with_a_long_name_or_lots_of_params
PARAMS ((type1 arg1, type2 arg2, typen argn));

The first style means more editing when changing the return type or
function name as all the following lines need re-indenting.

Same goes for definitions. This is a pain:

int some_func (a, b, c)
boolean a;
all_lined_up_sweetly * b;
int c;

Writing code this way almost guarantees that over time your code will
end up looking like:

int some_func (a, b, c)
bfd_boolean a;
not_lined_up * b;
int c;

Ditto local vars.

--
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre