Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] CODING_STYLE amendments

[malc]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2010, Jes Sorensen wrote:

> On 08/21/10 16:03, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> Could be "fun" for developers using Windows.  If they exist.
> > 
> > At least OCaml site offers binary download for Windows. I didn't
> > compile Coccinelle myself, so I don't know how much that helps.
> 
> I know nothing about Coccinelle, but I did find that yum knew where to
> get it. However, that said, I think we should try to avoid depending on
> exotic tools that may not exist on OSes which may be used by developers.
> What about OSX?
> 
> >>>> Even a working patch checking tool can only address the last issue
> >>>> (haphazard enforcement), not the other ones.  You may not care.
> >>>
> >>> Which other ones?
> >>
> >> Quoting myself:
> >>
> >>    [...]                                       the current CODING_STYLE is
> >>    idiosyncratic,
> > 
> > Personal preference. I liked Fabrice's style but I also like current
> > style. I would probably like Linux style except for the LISPisms. I
> > don't like GNU or Java style.
> 
> My favorite quote from the Linux kernel coding style:
> "First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding standards,
> and NOT read it.  Burn them, it's a great symbolic gesture." :)
> 
> >> While wasting time for historical reasons is certainly better than
> >> wasting time for the heck of it, it's arguably worse than stopping the
> >> waste.
> > 
> > But how would you do that? Drop the CODING_STYLE (and accept
> > anything)? Switch to a new CODING_STYLE that is widely appreciated and
> > so all bikeshedding will cease? Enforce current style?

Let's burn GCC, binutils and the rest of the stuff written in this style
too, the fact that Linus uses inferior editor is not good enough reson
to follow his style nor advice. That said, second sentence of the opening
paragraph of Linux's coding style document does resonate with me.

> 
> I would suggest we either clean up the existing rule, or switch to the
> Linux kernel style, with the explicit exemption that existing code can
> keep the 4-char indentation, unless the whole file is converted. I'd
> like to avoid a total reformatting of the codebase, but we could look at
> it on a file by file base if it becomes relevant.
> 
> Regards,
> Jes
> 

-- 
mailto:address@hidden