From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36923 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PeqdY-0006l6-QS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:04:53 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1PeqdX-0006RH-8P
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:04:52 -0500
Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.212.45]:45019)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1PeqdX-0006R7-60
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:04:51 -0500
Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so1949428vws.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 07:04:50 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D345A90.3030409@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:04:48 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: mass comment conversion from C99 to C89
References: <AANLkTinTgOoBtt=aTBiJQx3cJ5LBzqo_c7mPePEXuNhM@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinn-ddCtoga+UHFvfCH3arssDkc9q+hqX35v-s3@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinn-ddCtoga+UHFvfCH3arssDkc9q+hqX35v-s3@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 01/16/2011 06:12 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 15 January 2011 16:02, Blue Swirl<blauwirbel@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> With the sed script below (my first I think), I'm able to convert most
>> files in QEMU from C99 comment style to C89. When successive line with
>> C99 comments are converted, the comments are merged. Two files
>> (hw/rtl8139.c and microblaze-dis.c) still fail.
>>
>> Is this a good idea?
>>      
> I'm a bit wary of this kind of wide-scale no-semantic-change commit
> (and more so for things like indent, brace and whitespace fixes
> which can affect large chunks of actual code), because it makes
> it harder to deal with qemu forks (especially if you were hoping to
> be able to periodically rebase with an eye to eventually getting
> changes back into mainline qemu).
>    

Yeah, I'm equally wary of such changes unless they have a very clear 
value (e.g. changing an API definition to accommodate an extra parameter).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> This particular changeset doesn't touch target-arm so
> it doesn't affect me personally, though.
>
> -- PMM
>
>