From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756128AbYDFFSr (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Apr 2008 01:18:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751928AbYDFFSi (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Apr 2008 01:18:38 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:47731 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751896AbYDFFSh (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Apr 2008 01:18:37 -0400 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 22:18:22 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: apw@shadowen.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: relax spacing and line length Message-Id: <20080405221822.376f0018.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 06:54:54 +0200 (CEST) Jan Engelhardt wrote: > We all had the arguments about 80 columns, so here goes a relax. > Checking for 95 (or perhaps something better?), but of course we > print "80" in the output, because if you happened to get to 95, it's > "really time" to break it. This will reduce the usefulness of checkpatch for those developers who choose to observe an 80-column limit. > This also relaxes the tab doctrine, because spaces DO make sense -- > especially when you view the code with a tab setting of not-8. Non-tab-using code inevitably ends up having a mix of tabs and non-tabs and looks a mess if tabstops are set to anything other than eight. God I wish I had not been cc'ed on this.