X-Git-Url: http://git.cascardo.eti.br/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=CodingStyle;h=d1ef65b5a31ab689ba619dd3f40ef120df6ff4c9;hb=c47bb4350110a9b3aeb39b1c122c13b8914a7233;hp=628f21f837e6e8e43d91957e1e9da9b1388ea39b;hpb=49ab4a352480af0be1251fe77337f9280c5a1198;p=cascardo%2Fovs.git

diff --git a/CodingStyle b/CodingStyle
index 628f21f83..d1ef65b5a 100644
--- a/CodingStyle
+++ b/CodingStyle
@@ -3,7 +3,16 @@
 
 This file describes the coding style used in most C files in the Open
 vSwitch distribution.  However, Linux kernel code datapath directory
-follows the Linux kernel's established coding conventions.
+follows the Linux kernel's established coding conventions.  For the
+Windows kernel datapath code, use the coding style described in
+datapath-windows/CodingStyle.
+
+The following GNU indent options approximate this style:
+
+    -npro -bad -bap -bbb -br -blf -brs -cdw -ce -fca -cli0 -npcs -i4 -l79 \
+    -lc79 -nbfda -nut -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -sc -sob -st -ncdb -pi4 -cs -bs \
+    -di1 -lp -il0 -hnl
+
 
 BASICS
 
@@ -419,12 +428,10 @@ prints 255 but printf("%u", -1) prints 4294967295.
 network protocol fields or in other circumstances where the exact
 format is important.
 
-  Declare bit-fields to be type "unsigned int" or "signed int".  Do
-*not* declare bit-fields of type "int": C89 allows these to be either
-signed or unsigned according to the compiler's whim.  (A 1-bit
-bit-field of type "int" may have a range of -1...0!)  Do not declare
-bit-fields of type _Bool or enum or any other type, because these are
-not portable.
+  Declare bit-fields to be signed or unsigned integer types or _Bool
+(aka bool).  Do *not* declare bit-fields of type "int": C99 allows
+these to be either signed or unsigned according to the compiler's
+whim.  (A 1-bit bit-field of type "int" may have a range of -1...0!)
 
   Try to order structure members such that they pack well on a system
 with 2-byte "short", 4-byte "int", and 4- or 8-byte "long" and pointer
@@ -534,6 +541,11 @@ C DIALECT
     * bool and <stdbool.h>, but don't assume that bool or _Bool can
       only take on the values 0 or 1, because this behavior can't be
       simulated on C89 compilers.
+      Also, don't assume that a conversion to bool or _Bool follows
+      C99 semantics.  I.e. use "(bool)(some_value != 0)" rather than
+      "(bool)some_value".  The latter might produce unexpected results
+      on non-C99 environments.  For example, if bool is implemented as
+      a typedef of char and some_value = 0x10000000.
 
     * Designated initializers (e.g. "struct foo foo = {.a = 1};" and
       "int a[] = {[2] = 5};").