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;
Message-ID: <4c6f8d63817cbc51765fd0b3046f81dccbd17ec7.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] .clang-format: update column limit
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jun 2020 03:36:34 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CANiq72=BbGqXmiG8+1QuJnLXMTwNjUg9WuWR9eJcLMHZ=k5hQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200610125147.2782142-1-christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
         <c8851256aa453461481233e8a7fea878f9580c5b.camel@perches.com>
         <CANiq72=BbGqXmiG8+1QuJnLXMTwNjUg9WuWR9eJcLMHZ=k5hQw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.2-0ubuntu1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 12:03 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> Hi Joe,
> 
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 7:13 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > 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_"
> 
> Yes, but the related email discussions were not about establishing a
> new hard limit, but about avoiding such hard limits for
> historical/technical reasons.

Exactly.  So don't set a new hard limit of 100.

This would _always_ wrap lines to 100 columns when
80 columns is still preferred.

Imagine using a 100 column limit where a statement still
fits on 2 lines.  Now imagine the same statement wrapped
at 80 columns still fitting on 2 lines.

Which would you prefer and why?