On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:32:29AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 12:19:27PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:14:35PM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:

> > > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > >  /*
> > >   * Driver for the MAX9860 Mono Audio Voice Codec
> > >   *

> > Please don't mix C and C++ comments like this - it looks unintentional
> > and messy.  Just convert the entire comment block to C++ so it's
> > consistent with itself.

> NAK - that is exactky the wrong way to go.  Normal Linux comments are
> classi C-style comments and should remain so.  SPDX tags use c++
> comments exactly to be different and stick out.

During some of the discussions of the SPDX stuff Linus was expressing a
willingness or desire to just use C++ comments where sensible outside of
the SPDX headers, especially with single line stuff though this seems
like another useful exception.

Quite why we'd particularly need to have the SPDX stuff sticking out
isn't really obvious either; there's the desire to have something very
consistent to ease machine parsing but it's not exactly what I'd expect
most humans to be first looking for when they open a source file.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to