[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4c3c55ac-1dda-410a-7125-ca0e2acee44d@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 09:13:03 -0800
From: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@...cinc.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Jerome Pouiller <Jerome.Pouiller@...abs.com>,
<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
CC: <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] staging: wfx: format comments on 100 columns
On 2/28/2022 5:12 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 12:23 +0100, Jerome Pouiller wrote:
>> From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
>>
>> A few comments were not yet formatted on 100 columns.
>
> IMO, none of these changes are necessary or good changes.
>
> 80 columns is preferred.
>
> Really comments should most always use 80 columns, and
> only occasionally should code be more than 80 columns
> and almost never should code be more than 100 columns.
That was my reaction as well. Just because we've relaxed rules so that
we *can* exceed 80 columns, it doesn't mean we *should*, and definitely
doesn't mean we should *strive* to do so.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists