linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Add warning about leading contination tests

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:08:26 -0500
From:	William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
CC:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Add warning about leading	contination
 tests

J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> Where does this preference come from?
> 
David Miller -- in response to a patch of mine that used:
  - trailing && on existing lines that already had trailing &&, and
  - leading && on existing lines that already had leading &&, and
  - leading && on new code.

He decided he wants "consistency", existing code be damned.


> In
> 
> 	excessivelylongcondition
> 	&& anotherreallylongcondition
> 	&& yetanotherunbelievablylongcondition
> 	&& yetanotherwellyougettheidea
> 
> I want to be able to keep the &&'s all justified.
> 
Agree with you and Jean Delvare and thousands of other developers.


> Or look for well-typeset math or CS texts and try to find any that leave
> operators dangling on the right.
> 
Agreed.


> I don't really care much about this particular point, but: the
> checkpatch output is already getting too verbose to be useful, without
> adding advice that's actually the opposite of what I'd normally want to
> do....
> 
Yes, you are agreeing with a point Jean raised here, too.

Count me as opposed to this patch.

When I first looked at CodingStyle back in August, one thing that appealed
to me was the laid-back simpler style -- very few, very clear rules.

I'd prefer an addition to CodingStyle clarifying that we should not argue
about this minutiae.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/