2021-07-21 21:01:24

by Hu Haowen

Subject: [PATCH] checkpatch: add grammatical judgement for total output

There lacked a English grammatical identification within the final
output of checkpatch.pl such as the following:

total: 1 errors, 11 warnings, 4094 lines checked
^

Which violated the rule about the usage of the singular form and the
plural form. Hence fix the issue up and make it output the proper
sentence.

Signed-off-by: Hu Haowen <[email protected]>
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 11 ++++++++---
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 461d4221e4a4..eec96ed95262 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -7439,9 +7439,14 @@ sub process {
print report_dump();
if ($summary && !($clean == 1 && $quiet == 1)) {
print "$filename " if ($summary_file);
- print "total: $cnt_error errors, $cnt_warn warnings, " .
- (($check)? "$cnt_chk checks, " : "") .
- "$cnt_lines lines checked\n";
+ my $errors_str = ($cnt_error == 1) ? "error" : "errors";
+ my $warnings_str = ($cnt_warn == 1) ? "warning" : "warnings";
+ my $checks_str = ($cnt_chk == 1) ? "check" : "checks";
+ my $lines_str = ($cnt_lines == 1) ? "line" : "lines";
+ print "total: $cnt_error $errors_str, " .
+ "$cnt_warn $warnings_str, " .
+ (($check)? "$cnt_chk $checks_str, " : "") .
+ "$cnt_lines $lines_str checked\n";
}

if ($quiet == 0) {
--
2.25.1

2021-07-21 21:03:59

by Joe Perches

Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add grammatical judgement for total output

On Wed, 2021-07-21 at 23:14 +0800, Hu Haowen wrote:
> There lacked a English grammatical identification within the final
> output of checkpatch.pl such as the following:
>
> ????total: 1 errors, 11 warnings, 4094 lines checked
> ??????????????????^
>
> Which violated the rule about the usage of the singular form and the
> plural form. Hence fix the issue up and make it output the proper
> sentence.

NAK

I appreciate the desire for precision but I don't want to require
any automated downstream user of checkpatch to be changed.

I think users understand the output even though it may not be
grammatically correct in some cases.

> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -7439,9 +7439,14 @@ sub process {
> ? print report_dump();
> ? if ($summary && !($clean == 1 && $quiet == 1)) {
> ? print "$filename " if ($summary_file);
> - print "total: $cnt_error errors, $cnt_warn warnings, " .
> - (($check)? "$cnt_chk checks, " : "") .
> - "$cnt_lines lines checked\n";
> + my $errors_str = ($cnt_error == 1) ? "error" : "errors";
> + my $warnings_str = ($cnt_warn == 1) ? "warning" : "warnings";
> + my $checks_str = ($cnt_chk == 1) ? "check" : "checks";
> + my $lines_str = ($cnt_lines == 1) ? "line" : "lines";
> + print "total: $cnt_error $errors_str, " .
> + "$cnt_warn $warnings_str, " .
> + (($check)? "$cnt_chk $checks_str, " : "") .
> + "$cnt_lines $lines_str checked\n";
> ? }
> ?
>
> ? if ($quiet == 0) {

2021-07-22 10:07:34

by Hu Haowen

Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add grammatical judgement for total output

On 2021/7/22 上午12:03, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-07-21 at 23:14 +0800, Hu Haowen wrote:
>> There lacked a English grammatical identification within the final
>> output of checkpatch.pl such as the following:
>>
>>     total: 1 errors, 11 warnings, 4094 lines checked
>>                   ^
>>
>> Which violated the rule about the usage of the singular form and the
>> plural form. Hence fix the issue up and make it output the proper
>> sentence.
> NAK
>
> I appreciate the desire for precision but I don't want to require
> any automated downstream user of checkpatch to be changed.
>
> I think users understand the output even though it may not be
> grammatically correct in some cases.


How about another modification, which turns "errors" into "error(s)"?
In this case not only did the meaning convey but automated users won't
be confused toward their automatic programs.


>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> []
>> @@ -7439,9 +7439,14 @@ sub process {
>>   print report_dump();
>>   if ($summary && !($clean == 1 && $quiet == 1)) {
>>   print "$filename " if ($summary_file);
>> - print "total: $cnt_error errors, $cnt_warn warnings, " .
>> - (($check)? "$cnt_chk checks, " : "") .
>> - "$cnt_lines lines checked\n";
>> + my $errors_str = ($cnt_error == 1) ? "error" : "errors";
>> + my $warnings_str = ($cnt_warn == 1) ? "warning" : "warnings";
>> + my $checks_str = ($cnt_chk == 1) ? "check" : "checks";
>> + my $lines_str = ($cnt_lines == 1) ? "line" : "lines";
>> + print "total: $cnt_error $errors_str, " .
>> + "$cnt_warn $warnings_str, " .
>> + (($check)? "$cnt_chk $checks_str, " : "") .
>> + "$cnt_lines $lines_str checked\n";
>>   }
>>  
>>
>>   if ($quiet == 0) {

2021-07-22 17:04:28

by Joe Perches

Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add grammatical judgement for total output

On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 18:04 +0800, Hu Haowen wrote:
> On 2021/7/22 上午12:03, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-07-21 at 23:14 +0800, Hu Haowen wrote:
> > > There lacked a English grammatical identification within the final
> > > output of checkpatch.pl such as the following:
> > >
> > >     total: 1 errors, 11 warnings, 4094 lines checked
> > >                   ^
> > >
> > > Which violated the rule about the usage of the singular form and the
> > > plural form. Hence fix the issue up and make it output the proper
> > > sentence.
> > NAK
> >
> > I appreciate the desire for precision but I don't want to require
> > any automated downstream user of checkpatch to be changed.
> >
> > I think users understand the output even though it may not be
> > grammatically correct in some cases.
>
>
> How about another modification, which turns "errors" into "error(s)"?
> In this case not only did the meaning convey but automated users won't
> be confused toward their automatic programs.

I still think this doesn't need to be changed.