715 lines
		
	
	
		
			19 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			715 lines
		
	
	
		
			19 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
Busybox Style Guide
 | 
						|
===================
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This document describes the coding style conventions used in Busybox. If you
 | 
						|
add a new file to Busybox or are editing an existing file, please format your
 | 
						|
code according to this style. If you are the maintainer of a file that does
 | 
						|
not follow these guidelines, please -- at your own convenience -- modify the
 | 
						|
file(s) you maintain to bring them into conformance with this style guide.
 | 
						|
Please note that this is a low priority task.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
To help you format the whitespace of your programs, an ".indent.pro" file is
 | 
						|
included in the main Busybox source directory that contains option flags to
 | 
						|
format code as per this style guide. This way you can run GNU indent on your
 | 
						|
files by typing 'indent myfile.c myfile.h' and it will magically apply all the
 | 
						|
right formatting rules to your file. Please _do_not_ run this on all the files
 | 
						|
in the directory, just your own.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Declaration Order
 | 
						|
-----------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Here is the preferred order in which code should be laid out in a file:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - commented program name and one-line description
 | 
						|
 - commented author name and email address(es)
 | 
						|
 - commented GPL boilerplate
 | 
						|
 - commented longer description / notes for the program (if needed)
 | 
						|
 - #includes of .h files with angle brackets (<>) around them
 | 
						|
 - #includes of .h files with quotes ("") around them
 | 
						|
 - #defines (if any, note the section below titled "Avoid the Preprocessor")
 | 
						|
 - const and global variables
 | 
						|
 - function declarations (if necessary)
 | 
						|
 - function implementations
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Whitespace and Formatting
 | 
						|
-------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This is everybody's favorite flame topic so let's get it out of the way right
 | 
						|
up front.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Tabs vs. Spaces in Line Indentation
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The preference in Busybox is to indent lines with tabs. Do not indent lines
 | 
						|
with spaces and do not indents lines using a mixture of tabs and spaces. (The
 | 
						|
indentation style in the Apache and Postfix source does this sort of thing:
 | 
						|
\s\s\s\sif (expr) {\n\tstmt; --ick.) The only exception to this rule is
 | 
						|
multi-line comments that use an asterisk at the beginning of each line, i.e.:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	\t/*
 | 
						|
	\t * This is a block comment.
 | 
						|
	\t * Note that it has multiple lines
 | 
						|
	\t * and that the beginning of each line has a tab plus a space
 | 
						|
	\t * except for the opening '/*' line where the slash
 | 
						|
	\t * is used instead of a space.
 | 
						|
	\t */
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Furthermore, The preference is that tabs be set to display at four spaces
 | 
						|
wide, but the beauty of using only tabs (and not spaces) at the beginning of
 | 
						|
lines is that you can set your editor to display tabs at *whatever* number of
 | 
						|
spaces is desired and the code will still look fine.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Operator Spacing
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Put spaces between terms and operators. Example:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		for(i=0;i<num_items;i++){
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		for (i = 0; i < num_items; i++) {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	While it extends the line a bit longer, the spaced version is more
 | 
						|
	readable. An allowable exception to this rule is the situation where
 | 
						|
	excluding the spacing makes it more obvious that we are dealing with a
 | 
						|
	single term (even if it is a compound term) such as:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (str[idx] == '/' && str[idx-1] != '\\')
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	or
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if ((argc-1) - (optind+1) > 0)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Bracket Spacing
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If an opening bracket starts a function, it should be on the
 | 
						|
next line with no spacing before it. However, if a bracket follows an opening
 | 
						|
control block, it should be on the same line with a single space (not a tab)
 | 
						|
between it and the opening control block statement. Examples:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		while (!done)
 | 
						|
		{
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		do
 | 
						|
		{
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this either:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		while (!done){
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		do{
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	And for heaven's sake, don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		while (!done)
 | 
						|
		  {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		do
 | 
						|
		  {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		while (!done) {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		do {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you have long logic statements that need to be wrapped, then uncuddling
 | 
						|
the bracket to improve readability is allowed. Generally, this style makes
 | 
						|
it easier for reader to notice that 2nd and following lines are still
 | 
						|
inside 'if':
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (some_really_long_checks && some_other_really_long_checks
 | 
						|
		 && some_more_really_long_checks
 | 
						|
		 && even_more_of_long_checks
 | 
						|
		) {
 | 
						|
			do_foo_now;
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Spacing around Parentheses
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Put a space between C keywords and left parens, but not between function names
 | 
						|
and the left paren that starts it's parameter list (whether it is being
 | 
						|
declared or called). Examples:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		while(foo) {
 | 
						|
		for(i = 0; i < n; i++) {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		while (foo) {
 | 
						|
		for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	But do functions like this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		static int my_func(int foo, char bar)
 | 
						|
		...
 | 
						|
		baz = my_func(1, 2);
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Also, don't put a space between the left paren and the first term, nor between
 | 
						|
the last arg and the right paren.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if ( x < 1 )
 | 
						|
		strcmp( thisstr, thatstr )
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (x < 1)
 | 
						|
		strcmp(thisstr, thatstr)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Cuddled Elses
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Also, please "cuddle" your else statements by putting the else keyword on the
 | 
						|
same line after the right bracket that closes an 'if' statement.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	if (foo) {
 | 
						|
		stmt;
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
	else {
 | 
						|
		stmt;
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	if (foo) {
 | 
						|
		stmt;
 | 
						|
	} else {
 | 
						|
		stmt;
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The exception to this rule is if you want to include a comment before the else
 | 
						|
block. Example:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	if (foo) {
 | 
						|
		stmts...
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
	/* otherwise, we're just kidding ourselves, so re-frob the input */
 | 
						|
	else {
 | 
						|
		other_stmts...
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Labels
 | 
						|
~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Labels should start at the beginning of the line, not indented to the block
 | 
						|
level (because they do not "belong" to block scope, only to whole function).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	if (foo) {
 | 
						|
		stmt;
 | 
						|
 label:
 | 
						|
		stmt2;
 | 
						|
		stmt;
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
(Putting label at position 1 prevents diff -p from confusing label for function
 | 
						|
name, but it's not a policy of busybox project to enforce such a minor detail).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Variable and Function Names
 | 
						|
---------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Use the K&R style with names in all lower-case and underscores occasionally
 | 
						|
used to separate words (e.g., "variable_name" and "numchars" are both
 | 
						|
acceptable). Using underscores makes variable and function names more readable
 | 
						|
because it looks like whitespace; using lower-case is easy on the eyes.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Frowned upon:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		hitList
 | 
						|
		TotalChars
 | 
						|
		szFileName
 | 
						|
		pf_Nfol_TriState
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Preferred:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		hit_list
 | 
						|
		total_chars
 | 
						|
		file_name
 | 
						|
		sensible_name
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Exceptions:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - Enums, macros, and constant variables are occasionally written in all
 | 
						|
   upper-case with words optionally seperatedy by underscores (i.e. FIFO_TYPE,
 | 
						|
   ISBLKDEV()).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - Nobody is going to get mad at you for using 'pvar' as the name of a
 | 
						|
   variable that is a pointer to 'var'.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Converting to K&R
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The Busybox codebase is very much a mixture of code gathered from a variety of
 | 
						|
sources. This explains why the current codebase contains such a hodge-podge of
 | 
						|
different naming styles (Java, Pascal, K&R, just-plain-weird, etc.). The K&R
 | 
						|
guideline explained above should therefore be used on new files that are added
 | 
						|
to the repository. Furthermore, the maintainer of an existing file that uses
 | 
						|
alternate naming conventions should, at his own convenience, convert those
 | 
						|
names over to K&R style. Converting variable names is a very low priority
 | 
						|
task.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you want to do a search-and-replace of a single variable name in different
 | 
						|
files, you can do the following in the busybox directory:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	$ perl -pi -e 's/\bOldVar\b/new_var/g' *.[ch]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you want to convert all the non-K&R vars in your file all at once, follow
 | 
						|
these steps:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - In the busybox directory type 'examples/mk2knr.pl files-to-convert'. This
 | 
						|
   does not do the actual conversion, rather, it generates a script called
 | 
						|
   'convertme.pl' that shows what will be converted, giving you a chance to
 | 
						|
   review the changes beforehand.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - Review the 'convertme.pl' script that gets generated in the busybox
 | 
						|
   directory and remove / edit any of the substitutions in there. Please
 | 
						|
   especially check for false positives (strings that should not be
 | 
						|
   converted).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - Type './convertme.pl same-files-as-before' to perform the actual
 | 
						|
   conversion.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 - Compile and see if everything still works.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Please be aware of changes that have cascading effects into other files. For
 | 
						|
example, if you're changing the name of something in, say utility.c, you
 | 
						|
should probably run 'examples/mk2knr.pl utility.c' at first, but when you run
 | 
						|
the 'convertme.pl' script you should run it on _all_ files like so:
 | 
						|
'./convertme.pl *.[ch]'.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Avoid The Preprocessor
 | 
						|
----------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
At best, the preprocessor is a necessary evil, helping us account for platform
 | 
						|
and architecture differences. Using the preprocessor unnecessarily is just
 | 
						|
plain evil.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The Folly of #define
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Use 'const <type> var' for declaring constants.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		#define CONST 80
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead, when the variable is in a header file and will be used in
 | 
						|
	several source files:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		enum { CONST = 80 };
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Although enum may look ugly to some people, it is better for code size.
 | 
						|
With "const int" compiler may fail to optimize it out and will reserve
 | 
						|
a real storage in rodata for it! (Hopefully, newer gcc will get better
 | 
						|
at it...).  With "define", you have slight risk of polluting namespace
 | 
						|
(#define doesn't allow you to redefine the name in the inner scopes),
 | 
						|
and complex "define" are evaluated each time they uesd, not once
 | 
						|
at declarations like enums. Also, the preprocessor does _no_ type checking
 | 
						|
whatsoever, making it much more error prone.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The Folly of Macros
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Use 'static inline' instead of a macro.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		#define mini_func(param1, param2) (param1 << param2)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		static inline int mini_func(int param1, param2)
 | 
						|
		{
 | 
						|
			return (param1 << param2);
 | 
						|
		}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Static inline functions are greatly preferred over macros. They provide type
 | 
						|
safety, have no length limitations, no formatting limitations, have an actual
 | 
						|
return value, and under gcc they are as cheap as macros. Besides, really long
 | 
						|
macros with backslashes at the end of each line are ugly as sin.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The Folly of #ifdef
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Code cluttered with ifdefs is difficult to read and maintain. Don't do it.
 | 
						|
Instead, put your ifdefs at the top of your .c file (or in a header), and
 | 
						|
conditionally define 'static inline' functions, (or *maybe* macros), which are
 | 
						|
used in the code.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		ret = my_func(bar, baz);
 | 
						|
		if (!ret)
 | 
						|
			return -1;
 | 
						|
		#ifdef CONFIG_FEATURE_FUNKY
 | 
						|
			maybe_do_funky_stuff(bar, baz);
 | 
						|
		#endif
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	(in .h header file)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		#if ENABLE_FEATURE_FUNKY
 | 
						|
		static inline void maybe_do_funky_stuff(int bar, int baz)
 | 
						|
		{
 | 
						|
			/* lotsa code in here */
 | 
						|
		}
 | 
						|
		#else
 | 
						|
		static inline void maybe_do_funky_stuff(int bar, int baz) {}
 | 
						|
		#endif
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	(in the .c source file)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		ret = my_func(bar, baz);
 | 
						|
		if (!ret)
 | 
						|
			return -1;
 | 
						|
		maybe_do_funky_stuff(bar, baz);
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The great thing about this approach is that the compiler will optimize away
 | 
						|
the "no-op" case (the empty function) when the feature is turned off.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Note also the use of the word 'maybe' in the function name to indicate
 | 
						|
conditional execution.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Notes on Strings
 | 
						|
----------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Strings in C can get a little thorny. Here's some guidelines for dealing with
 | 
						|
strings in Busybox. (There is surely more that could be added to this
 | 
						|
section.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
String Files
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Put all help/usage messages in usage.c. Put other strings in messages.c.
 | 
						|
Putting these strings into their own file is a calculated decision designed to
 | 
						|
confine spelling errors to a single place and aid internationalization
 | 
						|
efforts, if needed. (Side Note: we might want to use a single file - maybe
 | 
						|
called 'strings.c' - instead of two, food for thought).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Testing String Equivalence
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
There's a right way and a wrong way to test for sting equivalence with
 | 
						|
strcmp():
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	The wrong way:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (!strcmp(string, "foo")) {
 | 
						|
			...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	The right way:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (strcmp(string, "foo") == 0){
 | 
						|
			...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The use of the "equals" (==) operator in the latter example makes it much more
 | 
						|
obvious that you are testing for equivalence. The former example with the
 | 
						|
"not" (!) operator makes it look like you are testing for an error. In a more
 | 
						|
perfect world, we would have a streq() function in the string library, but
 | 
						|
that ain't the world we're living in.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Avoid Dangerous String Functions
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Unfortunately, the way C handles strings makes them prone to overruns when
 | 
						|
certain library functions are (mis)used. The following table  offers a summary
 | 
						|
of some of the more notorious troublemakers:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
function     overflows                  preferred
 | 
						|
-------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
strcpy       dest string                safe_strncpy
 | 
						|
strncpy      may fail to 0-terminate dst safe_strncpy
 | 
						|
strcat       dest string                strncat
 | 
						|
gets         string it gets             fgets
 | 
						|
getwd        buf string                 getcwd
 | 
						|
[v]sprintf   str buffer                 [v]snprintf
 | 
						|
realpath     path buffer                use with pathconf
 | 
						|
[vf]scanf    its arguments              just avoid it
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The above is by no means a complete list. Be careful out there.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Avoid Big Static Buffers
 | 
						|
------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
First, some background to put this discussion in context: static buffers look
 | 
						|
like this in code:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	/* in a .c file outside any functions */
 | 
						|
	static char buffer[BUFSIZ]; /* happily used by any function in this file,
 | 
						|
	                                but ick! big! */
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The problem with these is that any time any busybox app is run, you pay a
 | 
						|
memory penalty for this buffer, even if the applet that uses said buffer is
 | 
						|
not run. This can be fixed, thusly:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	static char *buffer;
 | 
						|
	...
 | 
						|
	other_func()
 | 
						|
	{
 | 
						|
		strcpy(buffer, lotsa_chars); /* happily uses global *buffer */
 | 
						|
	...
 | 
						|
	foo_main()
 | 
						|
	{
 | 
						|
		buffer = xmalloc(sizeof(char)*BUFSIZ);
 | 
						|
	...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
However, this approach trades bss segment for text segment. Rather than
 | 
						|
mallocing the buffers (and thus growing the text size), buffers can be
 | 
						|
declared on the stack in the *_main() function and made available globally by
 | 
						|
assigning them to a global pointer thusly:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	static char *pbuffer;
 | 
						|
	...
 | 
						|
	other_func()
 | 
						|
	{
 | 
						|
		strcpy(pbuffer, lotsa_chars); /* happily uses global *pbuffer */
 | 
						|
	...
 | 
						|
	foo_main()
 | 
						|
	{
 | 
						|
		char *buffer[BUFSIZ]; /* declared locally, on stack */
 | 
						|
		pbuffer = buffer;     /* but available globally */
 | 
						|
	...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This last approach has some advantages (low code size, space not used until
 | 
						|
it's needed), but can be a problem in some low resource machines that have
 | 
						|
very limited stack space (e.g., uCLinux).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A macro is declared in busybox.h that implements compile-time selection
 | 
						|
between xmalloc() and stack creation, so you can code the line in question as
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		RESERVE_CONFIG_BUFFER(buffer, BUFSIZ);
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
and the right thing will happen, based on your configuration.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Another relatively new trick of similar nature is explained
 | 
						|
in keep_data_small.txt.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Miscellaneous Coding Guidelines
 | 
						|
-------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The following are important items that don't fit into any of the above
 | 
						|
sections.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Model Busybox Applets After GNU Counterparts
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
When in doubt about the proper behavior of a Busybox program (output,
 | 
						|
formatting, options, etc.), model it after the equivalent GNU program.
 | 
						|
Doesn't matter how that program behaves on some other flavor of *NIX; doesn't
 | 
						|
matter what the POSIX standard says or doesn't say, just model Busybox
 | 
						|
programs after their GNU counterparts and it will make life easier on (nearly)
 | 
						|
everyone.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The only time we deviate from emulating the GNU behavior is when:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	- We are deliberately not supporting a feature (such as a command line
 | 
						|
	  switch)
 | 
						|
	- Emulating the GNU behavior is prohibitively expensive (lots more code
 | 
						|
	  would be required, lots more memory would be used, etc.)
 | 
						|
	- The difference is minor or cosmetic
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A note on the 'cosmetic' case: output differences might be considered
 | 
						|
cosmetic, but if the output is significant enough to break other scripts that
 | 
						|
use the output, it should really be fixed.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Scope
 | 
						|
~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If a const variable is used only in a single source file, put it in the source
 | 
						|
file and not in a header file. Likewise, if a const variable is used in only
 | 
						|
one function, do not make it global to the file. Instead, declare it inside
 | 
						|
the function body. Bottom line: Make a conscious effort to limit declarations
 | 
						|
to the smallest scope possible.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Inside applet files, all functions should be declared static so as to keep the
 | 
						|
global name space clean. The only exception to this rule is the "applet_main"
 | 
						|
function which must be declared extern.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you write a function that performs a task that could be useful outside the
 | 
						|
immediate file, turn it into a general-purpose function with no ties to any
 | 
						|
applet and put it in the utility.c file instead.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Brackets Are Your Friends
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Please use brackets on all if and else statements, even if it is only one
 | 
						|
line. Example:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (foo)
 | 
						|
			stmt1;
 | 
						|
		stmt2
 | 
						|
		stmt3;
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (foo) {
 | 
						|
			stmt1;
 | 
						|
		}
 | 
						|
		stmt2
 | 
						|
		stmt3;
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The "bracketless" approach is error prone because someday you might add a line
 | 
						|
like this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		if (foo)
 | 
						|
			stmt1;
 | 
						|
			new_line();
 | 
						|
		stmt2;
 | 
						|
		stmt3;
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
And the resulting behavior of your program would totally bewilder you. (Don't
 | 
						|
laugh, it happens to us all.) Remember folks, this is C, not Python.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Function Declarations
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Do not use old-style function declarations that declare variable types between
 | 
						|
the parameter list and opening bracket. Example:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Don't do this:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		int foo(parm1, parm2)
 | 
						|
			char parm1;
 | 
						|
			float parm2;
 | 
						|
		{
 | 
						|
			....
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	Do this instead:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		int foo(char parm1, float parm2)
 | 
						|
		{
 | 
						|
			....
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The only time you would ever need to use the old declaration syntax is to
 | 
						|
support ancient, antediluvian compilers. To our good fortune, we have access
 | 
						|
to more modern compilers and the old declaration syntax is neither necessary
 | 
						|
nor desired.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Emphasizing Logical Blocks
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Organization and readability are improved by putting extra newlines around
 | 
						|
blocks of code that perform a single task. These are typically blocks that
 | 
						|
begin with a C keyword, but not always.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Furthermore, you should put a single comment (not necessarily one line, just
 | 
						|
one comment) before the block, rather than commenting each and every line.
 | 
						|
There is an optimal amount of commenting that a program can have; you can
 | 
						|
comment too much as well as too little.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A picture is really worth a thousand words here, the following example
 | 
						|
illustrates how to emphasize logical blocks:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	while (line = xmalloc_fgets(fp)) {
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		/* eat the newline, if any */
 | 
						|
		chomp(line);
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		/* ignore blank lines */
 | 
						|
		if (strlen(file_to_act_on) == 0) {
 | 
						|
			continue;
 | 
						|
		}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		/* if the search string is in this line, print it,
 | 
						|
		 * unless we were told to be quiet */
 | 
						|
		if (strstr(line, search) && !be_quiet) {
 | 
						|
			puts(line);
 | 
						|
		}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
		/* clean up */
 | 
						|
		free(line);
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Processing Options with getopt
 | 
						|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If your applet needs to process command-line switches, please use getopt32() to
 | 
						|
do so. Numerous examples can be seen in many of the existing applets, but
 | 
						|
basically it boils down to two things: at the top of the .c file, have this
 | 
						|
line in the midst of your #includes, if you need to parse long options:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	#include <getopt.h>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Then have long options defined:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	static const struct option <applet>_long_options[] = {
 | 
						|
		{ "list",    0, NULL, 't' },
 | 
						|
		{ "extract", 0, NULL, 'x' },
 | 
						|
		{ NULL, 0, NULL, 0 }
 | 
						|
	};
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
And a code block similar to the following near the top of your applet_main()
 | 
						|
routine:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	char *str_b;
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	opt_complementary = "cryptic_string";
 | 
						|
	applet_long_options = <applet>_long_options; /* if you have them */
 | 
						|
	opt = getopt32(argc, argv, "ab:c", &str_b);
 | 
						|
	if (opt & 1) {
 | 
						|
		handle_option_a();
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
	if (opt & 2) {
 | 
						|
		handle_option_b(str_b);
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
	if (opt & 4) {
 | 
						|
		handle_option_c();
 | 
						|
	}
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If your applet takes no options (such as 'init'), there should be a line
 | 
						|
somewhere in the file reads:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	/* no options, no getopt */
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
That way, when people go grepping to see which applets need to be converted to
 | 
						|
use getopt, they won't get false positives.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
For more info and examples, examine getopt32.c, tar.c, wget.c etc.
 |