lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Clarification for source code formatting around jump labels
    From
    Date
    >> I am just curious on how much further software development "fun" the recent update
    >> by a topic like "CodingStyle: Clarify and complete chapter 7" will trigger.
    >
    > I don't want to drag this thread onwards for (way) too long, but clearly "it is
    > advised to indent labels with a single space (not tab)" (from diff in above commit)

    How do you think about the reason (which you omitted from your quotation) for this advice?

    “…,
    so that "diff -p" does not confuse labels with functions.
    …”


    > doesn't really reflect the majority of kernel practice we have in-tree today and
    > actually rather adds more confusion than any clarification whatsoever:
    >
    > $ git grep -n "^\ [a-z_]*:" -- '*.[ch]' | wc -l
    > 4919
    > $ git grep -n "^[a-z_]*:" -- '*.[ch]' | wc -l
    > 54686

    So there is a mixture already.


    > A CodingStyle document should document what's regarded as a general consensus of
    > kernel coding practices, and thus should represent the /majority/ of coding style,
    > which (if I didn't screw up my git-grep line completely)

    1. Is the used character class specification complete in the shown regular expression?

    2. I guess that you should use the regex operator "plus" (instead of the asterisk).

    3. Would you like to try another source code analysis out which can be a bit safer
    with the usage of the semantic patch language?


    > above 9% does not really reflect at all.

    How tolerant are you for using an extra space character before the identifier for
    a jump label?


    > So, new folks starting with kernel hacking reading this are rather misguided,
    > and code-wise it just adds up to have more inconsistencies from new patches,
    > or worse, have noisy patches (like this one) flying around that try to
    > brute-force everything into this advice.

    In which ways would you prefer that the style specifications should be
    clarified further?

    Where should source code become more consistent?

    Regards,
    Markus

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-09-17 09:58    [W:5.957 / U:0.020 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site