lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Merging of completely unreviewed drivers


    On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Al Viro wrote:
    >
    > ... if your style is lousy. I agree that situation with printks is
    > not normal in that respect and I certainly have no love for the
    > checkpatch nonsense, but pressure to keep the fucking nesting depth
    > low is a Good Thing(tm).

    I do agree, but that has little to do with line length *directly*.

    IOW, I'd personally be happier with a checkpatch that calculated
    "complexity" and indentation over line length.

    There is definitely a correlation there: there is no question that complex
    lines with deep indentation tend to be long. So yes, "long lines are
    correlated with bad code" is certainly true to some degree.

    But sometimes lines are long just because it's a function call with
    multiple parameters, and it's just three levels indented, and it had a
    string there too. It may be long, but it's not complex, and keeping it on
    one line actually makes it much easier to visually parse (and grep for,
    for that matter).

    So I'd be happier with warnings about deep indentation (but how do you
    count it? Will people then try to fake things out by using 4-space indents
    and then "deep" indentations will look like just a couple of tabs?) and
    against complex expressions (ie "if ((a = xyz()) == NULL) .." should just
    be split up into "a = xyz(); if (!a) ..", but there are sometimes reasons
    for those things too!

    Linus


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-22 04:17    [W:0.023 / U:60.452 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site