Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-CCodingStandardsSpecification PATCH 1/1] Update Chapter 5 Source Files examples to follow the coding standard

["Michael D Kinney" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>]

Reviewed-by: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Rebecca Cran
> Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 4:27 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io
> Cc: Rebecca Cran <rebecca@nuviainc.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Leif Lindholm
> <leif@nuviainc.com>; Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>
> Subject: [edk2-devel] [edk2-CCodingStandardsSpecification PATCH 1/1] Update Chapter 5 Source Files examples to follow the
> coding standard
> 
> There shouldn't be a space after an opening parenthesis, or around
> unary operators.
> 
> There should be a space before a opening parenthesis and around binary
> operators.
> 
> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> Signed-off-by: Rebecca Cran <rebecca@nuviainc.com>
> ---
>  5_source_files/52_spacing.md                 |  8 ++++----
>  5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md     |  8 ++++----
>  5_source_files/55_preprocessor_directives.md | 14 +++++++-------
>  5_source_files/57_c_programming.md           |  6 +++---
>  4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/5_source_files/52_spacing.md b/5_source_files/52_spacing.md
> index fca0044a148b..9a97466f1d61 100644
> --- a/5_source_files/52_spacing.md
> +++ b/5_source_files/52_spacing.md
> @@ -103,10 +103,10 @@ by && or || must have each sub-expression on a separate line. The opening brace,
>  column of the associated keyword.
> 
>  ```c
> -while ( ( Code == MEETS_STANDARD)
> -  && ( Code == FUNCTIONAL))
> +while ((Code == MEETS_STANDARD)
> +  && (Code == FUNCTIONAL))
>  {
> -  ShipIt();
> +  ShipIt ();
>  }
>  ```
> 
> @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ This is not the case. The bitwise OR operator, '`|`', has lower precedence than
>  the equality operator, '`==`'. This results in the expression being evaluated as
>  if one had entered:
>  ```
> -8 | ( 8 == 8 )
> +8 | (8 == 8)
>  ```
> 
>  This evaluates to the value 9.
> diff --git a/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md b/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> index caaeab94b68e..0c4d6a26820c 100644
> --- a/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> +++ b/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> @@ -151,12 +151,12 @@ and hide each other. Never write code that does this.
>   7 {
>   8   UINT32 i;
>   9
> -10   for ( i = 0; i < 5; ++i) {
> +10   for (i = 0; i < 5; ++i) {
>  11     UCHAR8 MyVar = i; // Block scope
>  12     INT16 i = 12;
>  13
>  14     MyVar += 'A';
> -15     process ( MyVar, i);
> +15     process (MyVar, i);
>  16   }
>  17   *MyVar = i;
>  18 }
> @@ -165,8 +165,8 @@ and hide each other. Never write code that does this.
>  21 {
>  22   UINT32 George = 4;
>  23
> -24   MyFunction ( &George);
> -25   process ( MyVar, 0);
> +24   MyFunction (&George);
> +25   process (MyVar, 0);
>  26 }
>  27
>  ```
> diff --git a/5_source_files/55_preprocessor_directives.md b/5_source_files/55_preprocessor_directives.md
> index 98839f6677a8..3075285b7e31 100644
> --- a/5_source_files/55_preprocessor_directives.md
> +++ b/5_source_files/55_preprocessor_directives.md
> @@ -77,8 +77,8 @@ An order-of-precedence bug in a macro is very hard to debug. The following are
>  examples of macro construction:
> 
>  ```
> -#define BAD_MACRO(a, b) a*b
> -#define GOOD_MACRO(a, b) ((a)*(b))
> +#define BAD_MACRO(a, b) a * b
> +#define GOOD_MACRO(a, b) ((a) * (b))
>  ```
> 
>  The following examples should explain the difference between `BAD_MACRO ()` and
> @@ -86,9 +86,9 @@ The following examples should explain the difference between `BAD_MACRO ()` and
> 
>  * `BAD_MACRO (10, 2)` and `GOOD_MACRO (10, 2)` both evaluate to 20.
> 
> -* `BAD_MACRO (7+3, 2)` returns 13 = 7 + (3*2).
> +* `BAD_MACRO (7 + 3, 2)` returns 13 = 7 + (3 * 2).
> 
> -* `GOOD_MACRO (7+3, 2)` returns 20.
> +* `GOOD_MACRO (7 + 3, 2)` returns 20.
> 
>  Also, consider the following expression:
> 
> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ the equality operator, '`==`'. This results in the expression being evaluated as
>  if one had entered:
> 
>  ```
> -8 | ( 8 == 8 )
> +8 | (8 == 8)
>  ```
> 
>  This evaluates to the value 9 The desired result of `TRUE`, (1), can be achieved
> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ or a simple substitution macro.
>  Failure to do this will cause the build to break.
> 
>  ```
> -#define GOOD_MACRO(a, b) ((a)*(b))
> +#define GOOD_MACRO(a, b) ((a) * (b))
>  ```
> 
>  This is because the compiler has no way to differentiate between
> @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ Failure to separate macro names from parameters negatively impacts readability
>  and consistency with other coding style rules.
> 
>  ```
> -GOOD_MACRO (7+3, 2)
> +GOOD_MACRO (7 + 3, 2)
>  ```
> 
>  #### 5.5.2.7 Single-line Functions
> diff --git a/5_source_files/57_c_programming.md b/5_source_files/57_c_programming.md
> index 8b9db584eea7..a167f925536f 100644
> --- a/5_source_files/57_c_programming.md
> +++ b/5_source_files/57_c_programming.md
> @@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ Module parameters of a PERF_END invocation.
> 
>  ```c
>  for (Index = 0; Index < NumberOfEntries; Index++) {
> -  if (( LogEntryArray[Index].Handle == (EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS)(UINTN) Handle)
> +  if ((LogEntryArray[Index].Handle == (EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS)(UINTN) Handle)
>         && AsciiStrnCmp (LogEntryArray[Index].Token, Token, PEI_PERFORMANCE_STRING_LENGTH) == 0
>         && AsciiStrnCmp (LogEntryArray[Index].Module, Module, PEI_PERFORMANCE_STRING_LENGTH) == 0
>         && LogEntryArray[Index].EndTimeStamp == 0
> @@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ Re-ordering the predicate expression using this information produces:
> 
>  ```c
>  for (Index = 0; Index < NumberOfEntries; Index++) {
> -  if ( LogEntryArray[Index].EndTimeStamp == 0
> +  if (LogEntryArray[Index].EndTimeStamp == 0
>         && LogEntryArray[Index].Handle == (EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS)(UINTN) Handle
>         && AsciiStrnCmp (LogEntryArray[Index].Module, Module, PEI_PERFORMANCE_STRING_LENGTH) == 0
>         && AsciiStrnCmp (LogEntryArray[Index].Token, Token, PEI_PERFORMANCE_STRING_LENGTH) == 0
> @@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ a `goto`.
> 
>  ```c
>  Status = IAmTheCode ();
> -if (! EFI_ERROR (Status)) {
> +if (!EFI_ERROR (Status)) {
>    IDoTheWork ();
>  }
>  return Status;
> --
> 2.26.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
>