On 08/12/17 00:52, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 11 August 2017 at 17:48, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> We currently say "stick with 80 if it's convenient, extend to 120
>> otherwise".
>
> It doesn't say that. It says you can make an exception for postfix
> comments, which is not unreasonable imo.
The way
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:52:44PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 11 August 2017 at 17:48, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > We currently say "stick with 80 if it's convenient, extend to 120
> > otherwise".
>
> It doesn't say that. It says you can make an exception for postfix
> comments, which is not u
On 2017-08-11 15:52:44, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 11 August 2017 at 17:48, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > We currently say "stick with 80 if it's convenient, extend to 120
> > otherwise".
>
> It doesn't say that. It says you can make an exception for postfix
> comments, which is not unreasonable imo.
>
On 11 August 2017 at 17:48, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> We currently say "stick with 80 if it's convenient, extend to 120
> otherwise".
It doesn't say that. It says you can make an exception for postfix
comments, which is not unreasonable imo.
This means most of the code in MdePkg/MdeModulePkg (afaik)
Jordan,
MD tables work really well for small tables with short content
in each column.
Complex tables, and tables with sentences/paragraphs are
a challenge in MD.
I have considered changing the Revision History from a table
to a list to address this long line issue.
The only other option I ha
On 2017-08-11 09:48:50, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> We currently say "stick with 80 if it's convenient, extend to 120
> otherwise". This is too lax; much new edk2 code ignores the 80 columns
> recommendation, resulting in source files that are hard to read for some
> contributors. Remove the 120 columns
6 matches
Mail list logo