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  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, 22 Dec 2014 12:51:11 +0100
From:	Alexander Holler <>
To:	Joe Perches <>
CC:	Jonathan Corbet <>,,
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] CodingStyle: remove what nowadays might be considered

Am 21.12.2014 um 18:09 schrieb Joe Perches:
> On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 11:23 +0100, Alexander Holler wrote:
>> Am 19.12.2014 um 14:36 schrieb Alexander Holler:
>>> In times where things like checkpatch do exist and are mandated to be used,
>>> it would be easy to warn if too many levels of indentation are used (e.g.
>>> by counting leading tabs).
> checkpatch already does that looking for 6+ leading
> tabs then any statement that increases indentation.

Oh, nice. I didn't know that.

>> I've heared that wrong argument that a maximum line length
>> of 80 chars helps in regard to keep the levels of intendation low once
>> too often.
> I believe that argument correct.
> helps is not a mandate.
> The idea is that code that start far from the left
> (for some definition of far) is a signal that code
> could be refactored into more discrete chunks.

I think people just make variable and function names even more cryptic 
(shorter) in order to let them fit into the remaining free space. That 
seems to be easier for most than to refactor their code.


Alexander Holler
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists