This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFC-v2] BFD MinGW/Cygwin build error in bfd/peiXXgen.c
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: nickc at redhat dot com
- Cc: pierre dot muller at ics-cnrs dot unistra dot fr, palves at redhat dot com, asmwarrior at gmail dot com, gdb at sourceware dot org, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:02:30 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: [RFC-v2] BFD MinGW/Cygwin build error in bfd/peiXXgen.c
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <52B17083 dot 7040404 at gmail dot com> <52B1738D dot 4010409 at redhat dot com> <002101cefbf1$7554b9a0$5ffe2ce0$ at email@example.com> <52B1E03E dot 9010002 at redhat dot com> <006c01cefcaf$bec215b0$3c464110$ at firstname.lastname@example.org> <52B2E8C4 dot 3080208 at redhat dot com>
> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:38:28 +0000
> From: nick clifton <email@example.com>
> > Another silly coding style question: Should there by a space
> > between the address operator "&" and the variable or expression following?
> *sigh* There is no strict rule on this subject. Most people omit the
> space, I include it. I feel that since we separate other operators from
> their arguments we should do the same with &. I feel the same way about
> the asterisk operator too, but not many people agree with me on that one
Spaces around binary operators, no spaces around unary operators.
That's pretty much the universally accepted standard, and the one used
by the official C standard.
Everybody who thinks differently has been poisoned by C++ ;).