From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: kevin granade <kevin.granade@gmail.com>,
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>,
dm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Drop 80-character limit in checkpatch.pl
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:28:21 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0912180925130.3712@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0912181203040.3223@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
> Function declarations are often larger than 80 characters. And if you wrap
> them at 100, you are wasting every second line on 80-character display.
If you care so much, use a non-wrapping editor. That's what I do.
> If you make line length unlimited, the space will be used optimally on all
> displays --- a function with 200 character declaration will use 3 lines on
> 80-character display and 2 lines on 100-character display.
Yeah, and that's just crazy.
We all use good hardware these days, but we certainly don't have unlimited
line length. And wrapping is ugly. So sane people (definition: "me") use
editors that don't wrap (marking long lines at the end instead), and for
the very rare case when I use a small terminal, I'll need to go look if I
care (which is seldom).
> And besides --- wrapping at 100 doesn't fix the initial problem (why I
> posted this thread) --- that making any modification to the function
> header or long expression requires the user to manually realign the
> arguments.
Sure. Nothing fixes the problem that you need to _occasionally_ wrap.
But the real problem is that crazy people consider checkpatch.pl to be so
important that they wrap whether it makes sense or not.
Sense. It's what some people have. Too rare, though.
I'll happily remove the checkpatch.pl limit entirely, and ask people to
try to use common sense, though.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-18 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-15 21:57 Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-15 22:26 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-12-17 9:31 ` Américo Wang
2009-12-17 15:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-12-17 15:18 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-12-17 15:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-12-17 16:08 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-12-17 16:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-12-17 16:30 ` Janakiram Sistla
2009-12-17 18:05 ` Andi Kleen
2009-12-18 13:31 ` Pádraig Brady
2009-12-18 16:32 ` Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-18 22:33 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-12-18 13:04 ` Jiri Kosina
2009-12-18 13:55 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-12-18 14:39 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-12-27 17:15 ` Jon Smirl
2009-12-21 6:32 ` Paul Mundt
2009-12-22 15:10 ` Jiri Kosina
2009-12-16 10:58 ` Andi Kleen
2009-12-16 19:59 ` Alex Chiang
2009-12-17 6:12 ` Paul Mundt
2009-12-17 8:34 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-12-17 23:29 ` Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-17 23:35 ` Al Viro
2009-12-18 4:29 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-12-18 5:12 ` [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Change long line warning to 105 chars Joe Perches
2009-12-18 5:57 ` Paul Mundt
2009-12-18 17:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-12-18 17:54 ` Joe Perches
2009-12-18 18:41 ` Andi Kleen
2009-12-18 14:37 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-12-18 15:12 ` [dm-devel] " Alasdair G Kergon
2009-12-18 16:58 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-12-18 17:12 ` Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-18 22:36 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-12-18 17:31 ` Joe Perches
2009-12-18 14:28 ` [PATCH] Drop 80-character limit in checkpatch.pl Krzysztof Halasa
2009-12-18 14:52 ` kevin granade
2009-12-18 16:43 ` Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-18 16:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-12-18 17:09 ` Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-18 17:28 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-12-18 21:15 ` kevin granade
2009-12-18 15:11 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2009-12-17 22:37 ` Mikulas Patocka
2009-12-17 23:12 ` Paul Mundt
2009-12-17 23:33 ` Mikulas Patocka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.00.0912180925130.3712@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=kevin.granade@gmail.com \
--cc=khc@pm.waw.pl \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®