From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: warning: massive change to conditional coding style in net?
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:08:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B153F9B.7050502@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1259603798.29779.293.camel@Joe-Laptop.home>
Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 05:36 -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>> Over the past several days, David Miller (with help from Joe Perches)
>> made sweeping changes to the format of conditional statements in the
>> net tree -- the equivalent of mass patches that change spaces.
>> This makes writing patches for multiple versions of the tree very
>> difficult, and will make future pullups problematic.
>
> If it makes getting tcp cookies accepted difficult,
> a reversion is simple. That style isn't as important.
>
Then why make an *un*important (yet sweeping) change?
> I think writing a single set of patches for multiple
> versions of linux is not feasible. Feature changes
> occur in kernel source daily.
>
My patches were carefully written and applied with small fuzz to .30,
and .31, and .32-rc3.
>> if (condition
>> && condition
>> && (condition
>> || condition
>> || condition)) {
>
> The above is my personally preferred style.
>
That seems fine to me. And in some areas of the tree, nearly 100% of
other contributors, too.
My personally preferred style is the single spaced variant, that also
conforms to the strict letter of CodingStyle, to wit:
Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators
>> if (condition &&
>> condition && (condition || condition ||
>> condition)) {
>
> Except for the odd spacing, this is the significant
> majority of net/ style.
>
> The leading style was < 10%. It's less now.
>
That's only true in net/ -- since the overall tree was 18.7%, with
net/ < 10%, the density was *much* higher elsewhere.
But more important, at least to my thinking, is keeping patches simple
by conforming to the *existing* style in the section of code. No
sweeping changes!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-01 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-30 10:36 warning: massive change to conditional coding style in net? William Allen Simpson
2009-11-30 13:44 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-30 13:54 ` Alan Cox
2009-11-30 19:39 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-30 17:56 ` Joe Perches
2009-12-01 16:08 ` William Allen Simpson [this message]
2009-12-01 16:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-12-01 17:43 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-30 20:36 ` David Miller
2009-12-01 17:56 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-12-01 18:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-12-01 23:28 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B153F9B.7050502@gmail.com \
--to=william.allen.simpson@gmail.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).