Received: by 2002:a25:683:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 125csp674659ybg; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:35:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzxyttgBULVHZ5yZJ95pBCgPtVsnt3pI/URQ50nlavd8SJDwmnRiKpcct0XTDYFpwha64ZA X-Received: by 2002:a50:8307:: with SMTP id 7mr3506920edh.283.1591810519664; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:35:19 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1591810519; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Ofo1aichPKWlI+c8yHoka3KGbXf9dcffoL1Y4RBQoiRdTmrpP+0mv1nXFBXHvyb6SM m7FGMWhvmRYweDfowGR1/PB0o87EqF3HFw/FMnhWCYnZ9Mo2cafAK7C7Hylc7aY7aAG+ lxU/yF/BCkFZzGkaPqJHpKQFAAZ9XcWDsopx7ljrF7LW49/gm4MHthHsKWQyy7mw4Ky9 Fo9o1uXJjN16mFdX27zhab/3ST6X6Ve1Fe+OMFUsW7VfUxBYXC1lV8klouN0kOdwvMDW joCEXv+xNwtkFuEPk/yh20ZMrC11Vi9cHU+k7Mqmh4cI9SBkgRNbpthJzjvfzZlSOaES RHKg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=yi/43U3C8nLZO8ANXeiZd32sZHmYYYDquZgxJJvO/m4=; b=j2GWD4ChZLvmb5iBqG1Or+FteE8/qffmZhqqqyES+9f9hSyDb9yBUdI0G4h8Hz7f3j zVBmYe6DFuIIUyE8Sqc44RMOMxkT+p8BicNW+ymvoWBYw0lPh2JihWaMzfU+RZiLYvwB 2dHjHVHVyW6wX2qlvl0uA5klqoqT1aEmONF3/X3sc48ZP1KZrfFKL/rTAQ5xtPcpSnrD xgGU6vc7Fh+4l4DQFO3CFiShV0CdLj7wgzI037HpmTH0UHi6LXEQfYqNb8yOkD8qsCJT 45UcGkWZzJdUCiKqeu6Sctnp306EJvNuWEpW5AkhSAKem7Iz4CidVjSJ4i3ZI/QWCsCZ EeuA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id pj20si396276ejb.158.2020.06.10.10.34.56; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:35:19 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726738AbgFJRcM (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 10 Jun 2020 13:32:12 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:46747 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726332AbgFJRcM (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2020 13:32:12 -0400 Received: from ip5f5af183.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([95.90.241.131] helo=wittgenstein) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jj4a9-00074z-Vi; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:32:10 +0000 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:32:09 +0200 From: Christian Brauner To: Joe Perches Cc: Miguel Ojeda , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] .clang-format: update column limit Message-ID: <20200610173209.otq4nxx3ya6j4pat@wittgenstein> References: <20200610125147.2782142-1-christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:13:24AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 14:51 +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > The provided clang-format file wraps at 80 chars. If noone minds I'd like > > to adjust this limit to 100 similar to what checkpatch (cf. [1]) uses now. > > > > [1]: commit bdc48fa11e46 ("checkpatch/coding-style: deprecate 80-column warning") > > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner > [] > > diff --git a/.clang-format b/.clang-format > [] > > @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ BreakConstructorInitializersBeforeComma: false > > #BreakConstructorInitializers: BeforeComma # Unknown to clang-format-4.0 > > BreakAfterJavaFieldAnnotations: false > > BreakStringLiterals: false > > -ColumnLimit: 80 > > +ColumnLimit: 100 > > Ii think this is a not a good change. > > If you read the commit log you provided, it ways > "staying withing 80 columns is certainly still _preferred_" I read it; that's why the "if noone minds" is there. > > With this change, clang would _always_ wrap to 100 columns. > > clang would not make any reasonable attempt to use 80 when > it should. You make it sounds like it caps all lines to 100 columns when really it just does it for corner cases where we run over the 80 anwyways. I at least don't regularly write lines of code that cross the 80 limit. So when clang-format is called it's usually when something needs to be reformatted at which point using the more lenient 100 char limit seems sensible. But I don't particulary care about this patch. I can just override the .clang-format file if this shakes the world too much. Christian