Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272858AbTHKRLc (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:11:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272909AbTHKRIF (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:08:05 -0400 Received: from smtp.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.12]:48028 "EHLO smtp.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272898AbTHKRFa (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:05:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:04:25 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Larry McVoy , davej@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle fixes for drm_agpsupport Message-ID: <20030811170425.GA4418@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , Jeff Garzik , Larry McVoy , davej@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20030811164012.GB858@work.bitmover.com> <3F37CB44.5000307@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F37CB44.5000307@pobox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=0.5, required 7, AWL, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1535 Lines: 43 On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 12:58:44PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Larry McVoy wrote: > >A few comments on why I don't like this patch: > > 1) It's a formatting only patch. That screws over people who are using > > BK for debugging, now when I double click on these changes I'll get > > to your cleanup patch, not the patch that was the last substantive > > change. > > This is true, but at the same time, in Linux CodingStyle patches > culturally acceptable. I think the general logic is just "don't go > overboard; reformat a tiny fragment at a time." That ought to be balanced with "don't screw up the revision history, people use it". It's one thing to reformat code that is unreadable, for the most part this code didn't come close to unreadable. > at least don't run the damn lines together like > if (test) foo else bar; > or > if (test) foo > else bar; I wasn't suggesting that. I was saying if (expr) statement; // OK I was not endorsing this sort of unreadable crap: if (expr) statement; else statement; The exception I was saying was reasonable is if you are doing something like if (!pointer) return (-EINVAL); Short, sweet, readable, no worries. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/