From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758719AbYDJXw6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:52:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756391AbYDJXwv (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:52:51 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]:10214 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751686AbYDJXwu (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:52:50 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Gbbjxji8bqRqMZB45gYbg6IEtvdnSdEn0rM0rsK7X2vWxEv7wRa2S6fWrL+I3o+Z60u3x38FmVY28ymQzyqt2/9MvvR8vuCYdXTj+P7ENyaOF4L6fR+lYOQ4MvjqEIOcASnfavPG/C89oXupW4l8cPqcHtP9WjlkoVSB6xmcLss= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:52:49 -0700 From: "SL Baur" To: "Benny Halevy" Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: relax spacing and line length Cc: "Andy Whitcroft" , "Jan Engelhardt" , "Andrew Morton" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Randy Dunlap" , "Richard Knutsson" , "Stefan Richter" In-Reply-To: <47FCF6AF.8010703@panasas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080408171257.GF17915@shadowen.org> <47FCB458.3070403@panasas.com> <20080409132548.GM17915@shadowen.org> <47FCF6AF.8010703@panasas.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 156063d416ea6979 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 4/9/08, Benny Halevy wrote: > In http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/26/533, > SL Baur xemacs.org> said: > > The proposed two space change is ugly. Can someone NAK it? > > I'm not sure what "two space change" proposal this Steve referred to > and his rejection is based on not-to-sound aesthetic grounds. > > The motivation behind our proposal is more than just aesthetic. > I believe that using tabs for indent and then spaces for alignment > is functionally better, works for everybody, and will eventually result > in a more readable code over time, hopefully leading to fewer bugs. Tabs + a variable number spaces to match up logically with the previous line is O.K. Tabs + exactly two spaces is what I objected to. I only posted due to being the originator of the Linux Kernel Emacs cc-mode style and cc-mode works like the former. For whatever it's worth, my sentiments are on the David Miller side, having been the lucky recipient of format changes only patch bombs before. I suppose you should be glad you don't have someone running a spell checker on the entire source code. -sb