> > On Jan 24, 2018, at 9:14 AM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 01:55:18PM +0000, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:ovs-dev-
> >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Justin Pettit
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 2:31 AM
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] checkpatch.py: Add check for "xxx" in
> comments.
> >>>
> >>> "xxx" is often used to indicate items that the developer wanted to
> >>> look at again before committing.  Flag those as a warning.
> >>
> >> Does this mean that code that contains 'xxx' should not be accepted? I
> guess ideally we'd want a clean run from the checkpatch script when
> submitting/reviewing patches.
> >
> > I guess that clean "checkpatch" is ideal, but I apply a lot of patches
> > that do give checkpatch warnings because checkpatch isn't perfect.  I
> > think of checkpatch as something that raises possible issues that a
> > human should look at.
> 
> Yes, this was my thinking too.  I don't think we should have a prohibition
> against using "xxx", but I do usually see it in patches as something that
> was left behind unintentionally.  That said, my personal preference would
> be to not have that often in the codebase, since it usually indicates
> something half-baked, and more often than not, seems to be something no
> one comes back to address later on.

I'd agree, I guess there should be a valid explanation as to why it hasn't been 
implemented in the associated XXX comment. It'll definitely help to raise it as 
a point of discussion during the review. Sounds good to me.

Ian

> 
> --Justin
> 

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to