From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47406 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pechp-0000sq-Eu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:12:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pecho-0004wC-CN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:12:21 -0500 Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:51883) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pecho-0004vz-5B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:12:20 -0500 Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18so4544402wwi.10 for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 16:12:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:12:19 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: mass comment conversion from C99 to C89 From: Peter Maydell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: qemu-devel On 15 January 2011 16:02, Blue Swirl 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). This particular changeset doesn't touch target-arm so it doesn't affect me personally, though. -- PMM