Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753604Ab0GRJFJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jul 2010 05:05:09 -0400 Received: from khc.piap.pl ([195.187.100.11]:55119 "EHLO khc.piap.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753436Ab0GRJFG (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jul 2010 05:05:06 -0400 From: Krzysztof Halasa To: "Ted Ts'o" Cc: Randy Dunlap , Dimitrios Apostolou , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Nicolaescu Subject: Re: emacs and "linux" coding style References: <20100717065146.732f5449.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <20100718071552.GB4684@thunk.org> Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:05:02 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20100718071552.GB4684@thunk.org> (Ted Ts'o's message of "Sun, 18 Jul 2010 03:15:52 -0400") Message-ID: 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: 1089 Lines: 26 Ted Ts'o writes: > Actually, what my code use is tabs with a tab stop of 8 followed by > enough spaces (< 7) to align function parameters and to align > open/close parenthesis in C expression line wrap. To be honest, I do precisely the same, though I think it's far from perfect. It's just emacs which can't do better (or I don't know how to make it do better). > The main problem seems to be that Chapter 9 in > Documentation/CodingStyle is written by someone who feels that since > vi makes it easy to only align parameters using tabs, that everybody > should do it the same way as vi. I'm simply challenging Chapter 9 as > being canon. I certainly ignore it, and as a maintainer I tend to > accept either vi or emacs-style indentations with respect to > parameters and C expressions. Fully agreed. -- Krzysztof Halasa -- 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/