On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Sachin Kamat <sachin.ka...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 10 February 2014 17:51, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> > +#include <linux/device.h> >>> > +#include <linux/mfd/core.h> >>> > +#include <linux/module.h> >>> > +#include <linux/i2c.h> >>> >>> Please arrange these alphabetically. >> >> Why? > > 1. It makes it easier to avoid adding duplicate includes. > 2. Code looks more ordered/organized. > 3. Prevents further clean up patches arranging them so :)
1) I am sorry, but I need to disagree with this one, personally. Check duplicates could be done by a util at any given moment if it becomes a pressing issue. 2) Not for me. I prefer hierarchical dependency based inclusion between headers if there is such a thing, or just orthogonal if not. 3) It does not apply to my taste due to 1-2). I would also like to add further detriments: 4) file rename could rearrange the list with your suggestion. 5) It would be inconsistent with a large code base out there. -- 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/
