From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] new git check-ignore sub-command Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 21:34:27 -0700 Message-ID: <7vobl0804s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vvcfwf937.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <1348170383-15751-1-git-send-email-git@adamspiers.org> <7v4nms9yja.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vsjac8j52.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git list , Jeff King , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= To: Adam Spiers X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Sep 21 06:34:42 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TEuwr-0003Au-D5 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 06:34:41 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751636Ab2IUEeb (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:34:31 -0400 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:34740 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751472Ab2IUEea (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:34:30 -0400 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF4494BB; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:34:29 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ACMgfhizpkCMADrH66WHktR0fy0=; b=RKochq RIlvUPskxBGLh/hT/pbvBzE/UQ7dBbWHMZvw3RTnBH8piWSs1Xb6lzHzjBJ2HXPv CS+/DZhsRP6rmBe7T19Mzm77f/+hZpBOnBkIeEX5eHasB9baDwd0nfKKlmel0fOT A+RvzSvJQ/58cOqZA9nY49QoUygcnHIll55N8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=w+9R91VOvZzAJWwlRBYiiNvIHdqi1Nvb VU0gzLJdcoptP4MPDdCpndvw+2jhnyYimqmQvjtgcGPOs5iLDO+jcXoj9g4EyGzH F5EHo+7Lr1g+diKYHfna0j5FTer2GTrlGcsAn5MzDQz8Bn9YZ+PnfAm1ibV04YfL q9MDZMn8Rwc= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9FF94BA; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:34:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C857F94B9; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:34:28 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Adam Spiers's message of "Fri, 21 Sep 2012 00:45:04 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A17C1E6E-03A5-11E2-B6CE-18772E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Adam Spiers writes: > Sure, I can do that, but shouldn't this convention be documented in > SubmittingPatches? People must have learned this by imitating what senior contributors send to the list, but the "[Subject] area: title" thing does not appear in that document. I agree it should (patches welcome). >> I saw quite a few decl-after-statement in new code. Please fix >> them. > > Again, I can do that no problem, but again this convention is > undocumented and I am not psychic. Yeah, when there is no code that does decl-after-statement, with the "imitate surrounding code" rule alone, I agree that it is a bit hard to tell we do not allow it (as opposed to seeing a construct is often used and assuming that the construct is permitted, which is much easier). > I see that a patch was provided > 5 years ago to document this, but was apparently never pulled in: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/47843/focus=48015 I just read SubmittingPatches again and looked for 1a as found in that patch, and it is there. > I also see in the same thread that a patch to add > -Wdeclaration-after-statement to CFLAGS was also offered but never > pulled in, There is no guarantee your CC would understand it; you don't even know if it is a gcc in the first place. > I'm also curious to know why this convention exists. Are people > really still compiling git with compilers which don't support C99? See 6d62c98 (Makefile: Change the default compiler from "gcc" to "cc", 2011-12-20).