Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759555AbZLQQJX (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:09:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759111AbZLQQJT (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:09:19 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f219.google.com ([209.85.219.219]:54702 "EHLO mail-ew0-f219.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759039AbZLQQJS (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:09:18 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=H5OMPUrbKh2PCGdA11GOdNWKIecwkT4ZmLbUi7HYeZWY0XlXlTu/bGeIdcF5i32A/f m+aKsGu1mc1ZE0v+KaNt2UHowFIFlNNFL4UZHDex2xSRZ6boJldZqQpZu/zyg3UW9I6V w/DyRspB1HEF4yEm0sdo0Wv0sdZyyq32n1Z7k= From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] Drop 80-character limit in checkpatch.pl Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:08:07 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.32-0.1-desktop; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: =?iso-8859-1?q?Am=E9rico_Wang?= , Mikulas Patocka , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alasdair G Kergon , dm-devel@redhat.com References: <200912171618.32882.bzolnier@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <200912171708.07899.bzolnier@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1134 Lines: 35 On Thursday 17 December 2009 04:37:41 pm Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Dec 2009, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > > Examples? :) > > They're typically things like this: > > - ret = sscanf (buf, "0x%lx - 0x%lx", &start_addr, &end_addr); > + ret = sscanf(buf, "0x%lx - 0x%lx", &start_addr, > + &end_addr); > > ie a line-break that is just annoying and makes the code harder to read > rather than easier. Well, it could have been done in the other way: - ret = sscanf (buf, "0x%lx - 0x%lx", &start_addr, &end_addr); + ret = sscanf(buf, "0x%lx - 0x%lx", + &start_addr, &end_addr); Just an example that the limit itself is usually not a problem but its literal interpretation is.. I don't feel strongly about it the either way so how's about just adding the switch and than changing the default (Alasdair?) on top of it? -- Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz -- 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/