From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020308114929.009a27f0@pop3.clear.net.nz>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
From: Andrew Simmons <andrew@mbmnz.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: [9fans] Coding layout query
Date: Fri,  8 Mar 2002 11:49:29 +1300
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 61590ab8-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

Not wishing to start a religious debate here, but I notice that in the
Plan9 source code, the return type of a function is placed on a separate
line from the function name when the function is defined:

int
nurdge(int a)

or even

static
int
nurdge(int a)

whereas in the header file, the return type is on the same line:

int	nurdge(int)

It's not a style I've seen before, even, if memory serves, in TPOP, and I
was wondering if it was purely a matter of taste, or whether there was some
perceived benefit to be gained from laying the code out in this way - I
find it rather disconcerting at present.