From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39509)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Z5rol-0000kC-Sk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 04:38:32 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Z5rog-0000Om-Lc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 04:38:31 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41339)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Z5rog-0000OM-Fo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 04:38:26 -0400
Message-ID: <5583D4FD.1000300@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:38:21 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1434698944-3331-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<5583CE51.3020206@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <5583CE51.3020206@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CODING_STYLE: update line length and mixed
 declaration rules
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>



On 19/06/2015 10:09, Andreas F=E4rber wrote:
>> > -Lines are 80 characters; not longer.
>> > +Lines should be 80 characters; try not to make them longer.
>> > +
>> > +Sometimes it is hard to do, especially when dealing with QEMU subsy=
stems
>> > +that use long function or symbol names.  Even in that case, do not =
make
>> > +lines _much_ longer than 80 characters.
> Anthony had always allowed sensible exceptions to that rule, so +1 for
> reformulating it here.
>=20
> However, I would suggest that in that case we should lower the
> recommendation/warning to 78 chars, with the rationale of not only the
> actual code but also two-way diffs (79 chars plus =B1/space) and
> three-way diffs (78 chars plus 2x =B1/space) fitting into standard 80x2=
4
> windows.

Good idea.

> Either way, can you please decouple the two changes?

Sure, didn't want to spam people with a series on what is mostly an RFC.

Paolo