[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] CODING_STYLE.rst: Be less strict about 80 character limit
From: |
Laurent Vivier |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] CODING_STYLE.rst: Be less strict about 80 character limit |
Date: |
Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:51:41 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0 |
Le 06/11/2020 à 12:29, Peter Maydell a écrit :
> Relax the wording about line lengths a little bit; this goes with the
> checkpatch changes to warn at 100 characters rather than 80.
>
> (Compare the Linux kernel commit bdc48fa11e46f8; our coding style is
> not theirs, but the rationale is good and applies to us too.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> ---
> CODING_STYLE.rst | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/CODING_STYLE.rst b/CODING_STYLE.rst
> index 8b13ef0669e..7bf4e39d487 100644
> --- a/CODING_STYLE.rst
> +++ b/CODING_STYLE.rst
> @@ -85,8 +85,13 @@ Line width
> Lines should be 80 characters; try not to make them longer.
>
> Sometimes it is hard to do, especially when dealing with QEMU subsystems
> -that use long function or symbol names. Even in that case, do not make
> -lines much longer than 80 characters.
> +that use long function or symbol names. If wrapping the line at 80 columns
> +is obviously less readable and more awkward, prefer not to wrap it; better
> +to have an 85 character line than one which is awkwardly wrapped.
> +
> +Even in that case, try not to make lines much longer than 80 characters.
> +(The checkpatch script will warn at 100 characters, but this is intended
> +as a guard against obviously-overlength lines, not a target.)
>
> Rationale:
>
>
Applied to my trivial-patches branch.
Thanks,
Laurent
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [PATCH] CODING_STYLE.rst: Be less strict about 80 character limit,
Laurent Vivier <=