From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37733 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OnS6G-0005Ud-4k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:09:49 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OnS6E-0003Nn-FZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:09:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4746) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OnS6E-0003Nb-88 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:09:46 -0400 Message-ID: <4C722CC4.9080606@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 10:09:40 +0200 From: Jes Sorensen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] CODING_STYLE amendments References: <4C6A4291.1020105@redhat.com> <4C6A8CD8.2080701@codemonkey.ws> <4C715317.5020007@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho , Markus Armbruster , qemu-devel On 08/22/10 20:13, Blue Swirl wrote: > Well, consider for example mass braces conversion to the One Style, > whichever that is. Would it be better to do it in one commit or > multiple commits? If the latter, push all commits back-to-back or just > one at a time now and then? > > At the extreme end, we could even convert one statement per commit. > This would make bug hunting with git bisect extremely precise. There > would be a cost of long commit log. > > For the patch submitters, wouldn't one shot conversion (with one push, > one or many commits) be less painful? Hi, Yes, if we do it, I'd say one commit per file/file-set, like hw/irq.[ch] etc. >> and has elements making it harder to debug the code, like >> the braces around single line if statements. > > What's the problem? It chews up lines for no reason giving you less of an overview of the code. Obviously there are cases where it makes sense, but having it around a return statement is just a waste. >> I totally agree with Markus >> that it seems like wasted effort to come up with new tools and having to >> maintain them when there are good ones out there like the ones from the >> Linux kernel. > > I also find the tool argument very attractive. No other style has that benefit. Yes, it's a big win. Cheers, Jes