On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 12:34 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 12:28:26PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 12:18 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > The 80-character limit is not a hard-and-fast rule, nor should it be > > > applied blindly by people running checkpatch and fixing its warnings. > > > Sometimes it's better to violate the 80-character "limit" in the name of > > > readability, and when it isn't, it's often better to refactor into a > > > function or otherwise restructure the code rather than just finding > > > increasingly awkward places to break lines. > > > > > > Thus, change checkpatch's LONG_LINE warning to a --strict CHK instead. > > > Anyone wanting to use checkpatch to check for this can easily enough > > > enable --strict or turn on LONG_LINE explicitly, but it shouldn't be > > > part of the default warnings. > > > > I don't agree with this. > > > > CodingStyle says: > > ---------------------- > > The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a strongly > > preferred limit. > > ---------------------- > > Which is the subject of much controversy and extensive discussion, and > the consensus on the list (including by many maintainers) frequently > differs from that.
Been there, had that discussion. https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/18/3 I'm not applying/acking this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
