summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/CODING_STYLE
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>2015-07-31 20:00:07 +0200
committerLennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>2015-07-31 20:00:07 +0200
commitcad6982291a0e3cae4b8b1fad140ffd512e2835c (patch)
treed7f4ce95ac8a515d63e7f771c823678136acfe4f /CODING_STYLE
parent65c85ef5118d88bc0d3459b6e8854bf1846190b9 (diff)
downloadsystemd-cad6982291a0e3cae4b8b1fad140ffd512e2835c.tar.gz
CODING_STYLE: say that "for (;;)" is better than "while (1)"
Diffstat (limited to 'CODING_STYLE')
-rw-r--r--CODING_STYLE7
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/CODING_STYLE b/CODING_STYLE
index dbadfbdb54..a96ddd3598 100644
--- a/CODING_STYLE
+++ b/CODING_STYLE
@@ -314,3 +314,10 @@
are always defined after more global ones. Thus, our local
definitions will never "leak" into the global header files, possibly
altering their effect due to #ifdeffery.
+
+- To implement an endless loop, use "for (;;)" rather than "while
+ (1)". The latter is a bit ugly anyway, since you probably really
+ meant "while (true)"... To avoid the discussion what the right
+ always-true expression for an infinite while() loop is our
+ recommendation is to simply write it without any such expression by
+ using "for (;;)".