Feature request: cpplint should check for braces - rule 3

[Luciano Wolf]

According to Braces rule 3 of the Webkit coding style guidelines[1]:
"One-line control clauses should not use braces unless ... a single statement spans multiple lines."

cpplint doesn't complain about non-compliance with this rule when using the Qt foreach macro, as illustrated below

WRONG CODING STYLE: 

    foreach (AbstractMetaFunction *func, lst)
        qDebug() << "*" << func->ownerClass()->name()
                        << "Private: " << func->isPrivate()
                        << "Empty: " << func->isEmptyFunction();

RIGHT CODING STYLE:

    foreach (AbstractMetaFunction *func, lst) {
        qDebug() << "*" << func->ownerClass()->name()
                        << "Private: " << func->isPrivate()
                        << "Empty: " << func->isEmptyFunction();
    }

[1]
http://webkit.org/coding/coding-style.html

[Kenneth Rohde Christiansen]

Actually I believe that we still have no code checking for "missing" braces. And this is basically not Qt specific, but a case of a single statement spanning multiply lines.

Actually I just did the test:

3096         self.assert_multi_line_lint(
3097             'if (true)\n'
3098             '    myFunction(reallyLongParam1, reallyLongParam2,\n'
3099             '               reallyLongParam3);\n'
3100             '\n',
3101             '')

and it didn't catch the error, this should be using { }.

[David Levin]

Yes the code was added for telling you when to not have them, but there was no coded added for telling you when to have them.

[Adam Treat]

Lu(In reply to comment #1)
> Actually I believe that we still have no code checking for "missing" braces.
> And this is basically not Qt specific, but a case of a single statement
> spanning multiply lines.
> 
> Actually I just did the test:
> 
> 3096         self.assert_multi_line_lint(
> 3097             'if (true)\n'
> 3098             '    myFunction(reallyLongParam1, reallyLongParam2,\n'
> 3099             '               reallyLongParam3);\n'
> 3100             '\n',
> 3101             '')
> 
> and it didn't catch the error, this should be using { }.

It is a good thing we have a little tool called a *compiler* to tell us that :)

wink wink
nudge nudge

[Kenneth Rohde Christiansen]

Notice, it is a SINGLE statement, spanning MULTIPLY lines :-)

[Adam Treat]

(In reply to comment #4)
> Notice, it is a SINGLE statement, spanning MULTIPLY lines :-)

Oopsie, i read it wrong.  I see what you mean now.