[Bf-committers] code style proposal: switch statements

[Brecht Van Lommel]

Agreed, the proposed code style is fine with me.

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yesterday I went over missing break's in switch statements and found a
> surprising number of real bugs/errors in code (over 10), some rather
> bad errors like boids 'random' behavior option, falling through to
> 'average'.
>
> We didn't yet decide on details for switch() statements in our current
> style-code [1], but I think doing so would help avoid more mistakes
> like this as well as making code easier to follow.
>
> Most simple errors are not hard to spot errors but some code grows
> over time - we had a mistake with a switch nested inside a switch for
> eg.
>
> Note that this proposal is mostly what we do now anyway, so no large
> code cleanup commits needed for this and proposal is minimal.
>
>
> Proposal:
>
> - be consistent with placement of break, indent and include within braces.
>
> - intentional fall-through after statements in a case _must_ be commented.
>   (however successive case statements with no code can go without comments).
>
>
> Heres an image:[2] and text:[3] of what I think is reasonable and an
> example of whats not below.
>
> For an example of mixed up 'break' placement in current code, see
> BKE_object_minmax in object.c
>
>
> [1]: http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/CodeStyle
> [2]: http://www.graphicall.org/ftp/ideasman42/bad_switch_example.png
> [3]: http://www.graphicall.org/ftp/ideasman42/bad_switch_example.c
>
> --
> - Campbell
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers