Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932204AbZLRR3S (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:29:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755242AbZLRR3P (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:29:15 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:40186 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753608AbZLRR3O (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:29:14 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:28:21 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds X-X-Sender: torvalds@localhost.localdomain To: Mikulas Patocka cc: kevin granade , Krzysztof Halasa , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Paul Mundt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alasdair G Kergon , dm-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Drop 80-character limit in checkpatch.pl In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20091217061229.GD3946@linux-sh.org> <24653.1261110557@localhost> <7004b08e0912180652p42777da3h70906f2fbdb60a69@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1689 Lines: 42 On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > Function declarations are often larger than 80 characters. And if you wrap > them at 100, you are wasting every second line on 80-character display. If you care so much, use a non-wrapping editor. That's what I do. > If you make line length unlimited, the space will be used optimally on all > displays --- a function with 200 character declaration will use 3 lines on > 80-character display and 2 lines on 100-character display. Yeah, and that's just crazy. We all use good hardware these days, but we certainly don't have unlimited line length. And wrapping is ugly. So sane people (definition: "me") use editors that don't wrap (marking long lines at the end instead), and for the very rare case when I use a small terminal, I'll need to go look if I care (which is seldom). > And besides --- wrapping at 100 doesn't fix the initial problem (why I > posted this thread) --- that making any modification to the function > header or long expression requires the user to manually realign the > arguments. Sure. Nothing fixes the problem that you need to _occasionally_ wrap. But the real problem is that crazy people consider checkpatch.pl to be so important that they wrap whether it makes sense or not. Sense. It's what some people have. Too rare, though. I'll happily remove the checkpatch.pl limit entirely, and ask people to try to use common sense, though. Linus -- 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/