From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59940) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzF8u-0007U9-Bw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:49:49 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzF8t-0006XI-8a for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:49:48 -0400 Received: from mail-gw0-f45.google.com ([74.125.83.45]:40340) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzF8t-0006XD-2W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:49:47 -0400 Received: by gwb19 with SMTP id 19so1396754gwb.4 for ; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:49:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E5FFDF7.6090504@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 16:49:43 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1314752751.84463.YahooMailClassic@web27003.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4E5D8BAA.9010302@codemonkey.ws> <4E5D9570.1030201@codemonkey.ws> <4E5E3789.3010603@codemonkey.ws> <4E5E39DF.3080609@codemonkey.ws> <4E5E4540.5030408@codemonkey.ws> <4E5E5BF3.50801@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add support for r6040 NIC List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Blue Swirl , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, bifferos On 09/01/2011 02:39 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Blue Swirl writes: > >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> On 08/31/2011 09:35 AM, malc wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2011, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>>> >>>>> Upper case field names are not okay. If you think coding style isn't >>>>> clear, >>>>> that's a bug in coding style. >>>> >>>> Sez hu? Coding style is garbage that should be thrown out of the window. >>>> As for looking, yeah, i'm looking at usb with it's lovely hungarian >>>> fields, should we stampede to "fix" it? >>>> >>>> If the one who's going to maintain the code is fine with whatever naming >>>> is used so be it. >>> >>> No. That's how we got into the coding style mess we're in in the first >>> place. >>> >>> There's no benefit to going through and changing existing code but new code >>> needs to be consistent with the vast majority of code in the rest of the >>> tree. It's about overall code base consistency and maintainability. >> >> I agree about importance of consistency, though I'd even go further >> and reformat globally. New code gets introduced based on copying old >> code so the pain goes on. > > If we reformat globally (big if), I'm very strongly opposed to doing a global reformat. It makes it harder to use things like git blame which makes reviewing code difficult. Following a reasonable policy of using a consistent coding style and only fixing style issues when you touch code for other reasons is well established (this is the kernel policy) and over time will result in a reasonably consistent code base. Regards, Anthony Liguori Regards, Anthony Liguori