Re: indentation uncertainty

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb 13, 2018, address@hidden (Alfred M. Szmidt) wrote:

>>> return rup->ru_utime.tv_sec*1000 + rup->ru_utime.tv_usec/1000
>>> + rup->ru_stime.tv_sec*1000 + rup->ru_stime.tv_usec/1000;

>>> I'd consider this improper, since it puts the operator where it
>>> doesn't belong

>> Why does not belong IYHO?

>> The coding standards recommend that the expression follows below it
>> self.

>    Where?

> The examples being quite canonical IMHO.

I can't derive it from the canonical rules, I'm afraid.  Care to spell
out, quote or otherwise point to the rules you believe any of these
break?

  return foo
    + bar;

  return
    foo + bar;

  foo = bar
    + baz;

> Then they are doing it "wrong" -- or at least not following the coding
> standards

... or maybe the coding standards don't say what you seem to think they do?

> As for the disagreement, _I_ don't see it

I got contradictory responses from two different people about the very
point of contention that had been raised elsewhere.  If you can't see
the disagreement there...  would you like to borrow my glasses? :-D

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer