cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_timeout.c src/sys/sys callout.h src/share/man/man9 timeout.9

[Nate Lawson]

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Colin Percival wrote:
> At 00:32 07/04/2004, Nate Lawson wrote:
> >For this one, you can move the comment to above the "if" statement and add
> >a blank line before it.  It's usually best to comment on the whole block
> >above the if statement rather than within it.
>
>   Hmm... those comments are written in the context of the "if" blocks. Does
> it really make sense to replace
>
> if(foo) {
>     /* Bar */
>     ...
>
> with
>
> /* If foo, then bar */
> if(foo) {
>     ...
>
>   I'm generally happy to make style changes, but this seems like a rather
> peculiar change to make.

Nope, you've already included the check in your text so it can move as-is.
Consider this example:

+			if (wakeup_needed) {
+				/*
+				 * There might be someone waiting
+				 * for the callout to complete.
+				 */

wakeup_needed being non-zero means there is someone waiting for the
callout to complete.  So you've translated the check into English already,
no need to add redundant "if foo" text.  A more informative comment might
be:

/* Notify any threads waiting for the callout to complete. */
if (wakeup_needed) ...

> >Are you
> >going to remove that shim at some point?  Perhaps a BURN_BRIDGES or
> >GONE_IN_6 ifdef would be appropriate for that.
>
>   I think this shim can be removed as soon as any modules which know
> about callout_stop have been recompiled; I doubt it will take long
> before someone makes a change which requires that to happen.  :-)

It would be nice if it was gone for 5.3R.  Thanks for doing this work.

-Nate