On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:56:38 -0400 J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 11:18:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I'm not very happy with this. > > > > "CodingStyle" should be about the big issues, not about details. Yes, > > we've messed that up over the years, but let's not continue that. > > > > In other words, I'd suggest *removing* lines from CodingStyle, not adding > > them. The file has already gone from a "good general principles" to "lots > > of stupid details". Let's not make it worse. > > It'd be nice to split the current CodingStyle into two documents:
I agree. This is just what I was thinking during lunch. > - A shorter CodingStyle that gives the spirit of the style > (short functions, minimal nesting, logic as straightforward as > possible, etc.), and addresses the most commonly repeated > mistakes, without so much detail that people's eyes glaze > over. You want to be able to recommend it to your students > (or whoever) in reasonable confidence that they'll actually > read it and have fun (leave the jokes in!). Currently I'm > suspicious that it's becoming something that everybody > recommends but noone bothers to sit down and read anymore > unless they're working on it. > > - A CodingStyleReference that's just a long dry list of rules, > organized to make it easy to look up an individual rule when > needed. That'd also take the pressure of CodingStyle to > accept every new detail. > > It'd be a start just to revert CodingStyle to its original content and > move the rest to CodingStyleReference. But someone would want to skim > through the CodingStyle history for any legimate corrections that we > want to keep. --- ~Randy Phaedrus says that Quality is about caring. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
