On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 11:37:57PM +1200, Dave Sainty wrote:
> Roland Illig writes:
> 
> > > +	if (kill(kp->p_pid, signum) == -1) {
> > > +		if (errno == ESRCH)
> > > +			/*
> > > +			 * The process disappeared between us matching
> > > +			 * it and us signalling it.  Return 0 to
> > > +			 * indicate that the process should not be
> > > +			 * considered a match.
> > > +			 */
> > > +			return 0;
> > 
> > Could you please but braces around the comment and the return? (twice)
> 
> Style says "Don't add braces that aren't necessary except in cases
> where there are ambiguity or readability issues.".  It's probably open
> to interpretation whether this case is an ambiguity or readability
> issue :)

Usually I take it for granted that programmers are going to read code
according to "Gestalt rules" of visual layout, not syntax, because they're
people, not parsers.  Consecutive lines of code that all start in the
same column will be read and edited as a "block," curly braces or not.
If you code a "block" (Gestalt rules) as a "block" (parser rules), then
you're going to save a fellow programmer-person a cursing fit later when
they add a line to that "block."

That said, my recommendation is to put curly braces on that thar code,
or else to move the comment outside of the if-statement.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung@ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933