[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121120201142.GI17797@dm>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:11:42 +0000
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
To: Eilon Greenstein <eilong@...adcom.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: add double empty line check
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 07:32:49PM +0000, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 09:10:35PM +0200, Eilon Greenstein wrote:
>
> > About the logic - true, if diff will show deleted lines after newly
> > added lines, some new double line segments will be missed. However, it
> > seems like few other things will break if diff will start acting out
> > like that. The suggestion you posted earlier will miss those as well,
> > and starting to check for this weird case (of deleted lines after the
> > added lines) does not seem right.
>
> Actually the version I sent should indeed cope with the deleted lines
> regardless of order. It was cirtainly intended to.
... and I think I thought of a couple more corner cases neither solution
will find. So I am going to go away and make up a proper set of tests
for this apparently simple change. As it is really annoying when it
false positives. I will post against when I have something which works.
-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