[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080409135840.GO17915@shadowen.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 14:58:40 +0100
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: relax spacing and line length
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 03:18:47PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 2008-04-09 15:14, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 10:46:06AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> > Oh, and if people felt that the concensus was for something to be
> >> > implemented and that you are waiting for me to implement the change in
> >> > checkpatch; please say so.
> >>
> >> Well at least I think the printk change is a good one to implement and there
> >> wasn't much protest to it at least.
> >
> >Ok. will put this on my todo list.
>
> Instead of
>
> if (foo) {
> if (baz) {
> ++x;
> printk("Oh so long line makes my coding style go wary... nonsensical sentence\n");
> }
> }
>
> I'd keep the indent and allow elongated lines:
>
> if (foo) {
> if (baz) {
> ++x;
> printk("Oh so long line makes my coding style go wary... nonsensical sentence\n");
> }
> }
>
> Or perhaps you just pointed out we need a smarter grep program! :)
My preference would be for the latter. Keep the line indent consistent
and allow the line to overspill. But that would depend on the concensus
obviously. The originally suggested layout was:
printk(
"Oh ....",
a, b);
-apw
--
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