On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 01:57 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:41 AM Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 00:05 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > > > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose > > > test descriptions. > > > > > > The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled by the flag > > > --verbose. [] > > > Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst: > > > > > > .. CHECKPATCH_START > > > > Nak on the keyword uses. > > > > This should really just parse the input file whenever TYPE is found > > via some fixed format and save the verbose description after that. > > > > Use .rst Field Lists instead, and ideally, keep the list in alphabetic > > order or group by similar use. > > > > https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/user/rst/quickref.html#field-lists > > > > e.g.: > > > > :LINE_SPACING: > > Vertical space is wasted given the limited number of lines an > > editor window can display when multiple blank lines are used. > > > > :SPACING: > > Whitespace style used in the kernel sources is described in > > ref:`Documentation/process/Coding-Style.rst section 3.1. > > > > :TRAILING_WHITESPACE: > > Trailing whitespace should always be removed. > > Some editors highlight the trailing whitespace and cause visual > > distractions when editing files. > > > > etc... [] > for the output part can we do something to make the text > look a bit more nice? I think some of the verbose descriptions > can go a bit long.
Which is why verbose should be optional. > Also will the verbose descriptions be limited to say single > paragraphs? Ideally, no. > If there are multiple paragraphs then the output > does appear a bit messy. I fail to see how that's a problem but play with it and see what you can do.
