This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 11/05/2015 02:32 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
I think we should move to the 3rd form when possible. I didn't even know the language supported unnamed arguments in this way until recently :-)When reviewing patches I'm never quite sure which of the following we should be using: some_target_hook (tree decl, machine_mode mode ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED) some_target_hook (tree decl, machine_mode ARG_UNUSED (mode)) some_target_hook (tree decl, machine_mode /* mode */) some_target_hook (tree decl, machine_mode) Any opinions? I'm leaning towards the last version since it's idiomatic in the language we're using and has the least amount of visual clutter. If no one comments, I'll start enforcing that in patch reviews. Currently no one seems sure and everything is getting totally inconsistent.
Bringing some consistency to this will be nice. jeff
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |