[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46835BD5.8070904@garzik.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:57:25 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
hch@...radead.org, johnstul@...ibm.com, oleg@...sign.ru,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
davem@...emloft.net, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5 v2] Convert tasklets to work queues
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So do cleanups _separately_ from movement.
Definitely. Anything else makes review more difficult, by obscuring
changes with movement.
> Quite frankly, I personally am considering removing "checkpatch.pl". That
> thing is just a nazi dream. That hard-coded 80-character limit etc is just
> bad taste.
>
> Dammit, code cleanliness is not about "automated and mindless slavish
> following of rules". A process that is too inflexible is a *bad* process.
> I'd much rather have a few 80+ character lines than stupid and unreadable
> line wrapping just because the line hit 87 characters in length.
I don't think checkpatch should be removed, but the 80-column complaint
is -way- too obnoxious and stupid-simple.
This bugs me like the myriad recent Documentation/CodingStyle proposed
patches... It's STYLE dammit. Sometimes it's best to /not/ lock down
everything into a rule. There is such a thing as specifying too much.
Jeff
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists