From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48342 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5glK-0003X4-Sp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:59:51 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Q5glF-0003cI-KN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:59:46 -0400
Received: from mail-yx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173]:52088)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Q5glF-0003bt-HL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:59:45 -0400
Received: by yxk8 with SMTP id 8so1723031yxk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 08:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=+XcYfjGdvh_VxEomJMX3zSoYUZx9-wPtpVE0c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1301671255-27717-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<AANLkTi=+XcYfjGdvh_VxEomJMX3zSoYUZx9-wPtpVE0c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 16:59:44 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTik2sBYGEVv6N4ZeATFK8qNZjAOXeBJVQaoya6ZX@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] checkpatch.pl: warn on C99 comments, but don't fail
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 1 April 2011 16:20, Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> We also make C99 //comments a warning instead of an error, since they
>> don't actually violate QEMU's coding guidelines.
>
> We should either update the guidelines or fix the script...

There are a whole bunch of // in the codebase.  I prefer /* */ but as
it stands I think // should not even raise a warning.

Stefan