linux-kernel - Re: [patch] checkpatch: putting the && or || on the wrong line

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

Date:	Thu, 6 Jan 2011 03:55:56 -0800 (PST)
From:	Martin Knoblauch <spamtrap@...bisoft.de>
To:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: putting the && or || on the wrong line

----- Original Message ----

> From: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
> To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
> Cc: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>; J. Bruce Fields 
><bfields@...ldses.org>; Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>; Andy Whitcroft 
><apw@...onical.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; 
>kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
> Sent: Wed, January 5, 2011 6:38:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: putting the && or || on the wrong line
> 
> Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> writes:
> 
> > As do  I, but perhaps coding style in a project like this
> > shouldn't be personal  but collective.
> 
> I think there is nothing like a collective style.
> What  you can eventually achieve is a style everybody hates.
> 
> > The trailing  style outnumbers the leading style ~ 5:1.
> >
> > $ grep -rP  --include=*.[ch] "(\|\||&&)[ \t]*$" * | wc -l
> > 39890
> > $  grep -rP --include=*.[ch] "^[ \t]*(\|\||&&)" * | wc -l
> >  8244
> >
> > If you take out drivers/staging, trailing is used ~  6:1.
> >
> > I think that high enough to be declared the preferred  style.

 Nobody defines which style *I* prefer. One (in this case the compiler) may 
define which laws I obey, but not which style I like. As long as the compiler 
accepts both notations and generates the same code there is no "law" against 
either.

> 
> This is a very weak reason (if any at all) to do so. Increasing  e.g.

 indeed.

> readability of the code would be a good reason, but  statistics?
> 

 But who is defining readability? That is not a technical term at all. What I 
view as readable may completely from your or Joes or anybody elses opinion.

> Maybe: Microsoft Windows outnumbers Linux X:1, so it should  be declared
> the "preferred" system (= the only allowed, as with CodingStyle  and
> checkpatch "errors").
> 
> Or: cars outnumber trucks X:1, declare the  trucks illegal.

 I would really think about supporting that :-)

> Coffee drinkers outnumber tee drinkers, kill the  later.
>

 Here I am for personal freedom :-)
 
> 
> Yes, we need some basic common style (tabs length,  unless/until we can
> use any tab length), K&R (or other) parentheses, void  *var instead of
> void* var (void* var1, var2 bugs), (no) spaces etc. Anything  less make

 Actually if this allows ambigous code, the language has a problem. But yeah, a 
tool to enforce one way is good.

> the code unreadable or less readable. We should stop dictating  the
> details when the benefits end, and they end pretty fast.

 Amen.

Cheers
Martin

--
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/