Style change: return(x) --> return x

This was discussed and more or less agreed upon on the mailing list. A
huge checkin, but if we just do it and let people adjust the pain will
end soon enough. Rebasing should be relatively straighforward for anyone
that sees conflicts; just be sure you use the new return style if
possible.

The following semantic patch was used to do the change, along with some
hand-massaging in order to preserve parenthesis where appropriate:

The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows, although some
hand-massaging was done in order to keep parenthesis where appropriate:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)

// <smpl>
@@
expression a;
@@
- return(a);
+ return a;

// </smpl>

A macros_file was also provided with the following content:

Additional steps taken, mainly for ASSERT() macros:
$ sed -i -e 's#return(NULL)#return NULL#' lib/libalpm/*.c
$ sed -i -e 's#return(-1)#return -1#' lib/libalpm/*.c

Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING
index c659ff0b..2df7ecc7 100644
--- a/HACKING
+++ b/HACKING
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ while(it) {
   if(fn) {
     fn(it->data);
   } else {
-    return(1);
+    return 1;
   }
   free(it);
   it = ptr;
@@ -67,11 +67,11 @@ alpm_list_t *alpm_list_add(alpm_list_t *list, void *data)
        NOT
     // This is a comment
 
-5.  Return statements should be written like a function call.
+5.  Return statements should *not* be written like function calls.
 
-    return(0);
-       NOT
     return 0;
+       NOT
+    return(0);
 
 6.  The sizeof() operator should accept a type, not a value. (TODO: in certain
     cases, it may be better- should this be a set guideline? Read "The Practice