On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Jean Delvare <jdelv...@suse.de> wrote: > Hi Ilya, > > Sorry for the late answer. > > On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:31:57 +0200, Ilya Dryomov wrote: >> Sorry, navigating lkml.org archive is a pain, and I was expecting to >> see patch. Your points >> >> "The acceptance of an optional single space before labels dates back to >> at least June 2007, as supported by the very first incarnation of >> checkpatch.pl. So nothing really new here, except for a preference >> (my preference, admittedly, but I'm know I'm not alone) being expressed >> in the coding style document." >> >> "Recommendations are not meant to document what people are currently >> doing but what we think they should be doing." >> >> are valid, but note that there is a world of difference between an >> acceptance and a preference. The *only* point of whitespace guidelines >> is to keep the code base consistent. > > Consistency is half of the reason, the other half is readability. This > is why the CodingStyle document has a number of rationales explained. > This is also why we put whitespace in the first place, while the C > language doesn't require any ;-) > > The sense of my proposal was to address a readability (or usability) > issue. > >> You don't go changing whitespace >> preferences in such a huge project, not unless you have a *very* good >> rationale and existing code base is swayed (which it isn't, given the >> 9/10 ratio). > > I did consider the reason to be good enough to warrant a "change", > actually. Or more exactly from "one space is allowed" to "one space is > recommended." Which is quite different from changing all the code > actively. I can understand how you don't like it, but again, this > "inconsistency" has been accepted for almost a decade now, so I find it > strange to see so much resistance when someone finally tries to sort it > out.
Yeah, I guess that's where our disagreement lies - the "so that `diff -p` does not confuse labels with functions" in the age of git, hg and others, all of which can be customized to your heart's content is not a good enough reason to go from "allowed" to "advised". > >> >> If I wanted to clarify the >> >> situation, I'd have gone with "one space indented labels are also >> >> acceptable" or so. The example you've re-indented dates back to 2.6.4 >> >> times... >> > >> > I can't see how this is relevant. >> >> That was a 12 year old example, codifying an existing style used in >> ~90% cases, serving as a guideline for new contributors. > > OK, I get your point now. But the CodingStyle document isn't carved > into stone. I see 43 changes to that file in recent history (since > April 2005), some of which are actual changes or clarifications of our > coding style. This very section of the document was updated in December > 2014, so not so long ago. > > In the end I suppose it boils down to how problematic you consider the > current situation to be. Apparently you and several other maintainers > think it's just fine, while me (and a few others apparently) think it > is not. > >> >> git diff also works on regular files, BTW. >> > >> > I have no idea what you mean here, sorry. >> >> Oh, just that it works outside of git repos too, so you aren't stuck >> with diffutils if you want to diff two random .c files. > > Oh, I had never thought of that. Thanks for the hint :-) > >> > (...) >> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=147325166209844&w=2 >> > >> > It uses the git diff xfuncname feature you mentioned above. To be >> > honest I'm surprised it isn't the git default, it seems odd to have so >> > many diff drivers included in git and not enable them on obvious file >> > extensions. Oh well. >> >> This came up before: http://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg164216.html, >> Linus didn't like it. I suggest you add him to the CC on this patch to >> see if he changed his mind. > > Thanks for the pointer. It is interesting to see many people had been > bothered by the same problem for many years and even proposed solution > for it. But also sad to see that nothing happened :-( > > Well Linus suggested to improve the default, he was not opposed to the > change per se I think. But it was 5 years ago and nothing happened > since then, so I'd rather go with what is available today. Which means > either one space before labels, or drivers in .gitattributes. Choose > your poison ;-) Jon, ping? My points upthread aside, both CodingStyle and .gitattributes patches seem to be queued... Thanks, Ilya
