Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes: > On 07/09/2015 17:23, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> > Apart from copy-n-pasting, there is also the problem that you can run >> > "checkpatch.pl -f" on a whole file ... it would also be ugly to suddenly >> > have (much) more warnings here. >> >> Feature. If you run checkpatch on a whole file, you obviously do it to >> find its ugly spots. Lines longer than 76 characters qualify. > > Based on the statistics, half of QEMU's files has at least one 76-79 > character line. The noise from checkpatch.pl -f is actually a worse > thing than the cut-and-paste, but that's something that can be fixed in > other ways (e.g. different strictness for checkpatch.pl vs. > checkpatch.pl -f).
Yup. > That said, and even though Thomas obviously hasn't read the previous > discussion, :) I do believe that 76 characters is too strict a limit. It's not a strict limit, it's a warning. The strict limit is 90. > 76 would be great (two levels of email quoting are what you get 99% of > the time), and 78 would be nice, but I believe 79 provides the biggest > bang for the buck. 78 gives one level of quoting, and two-way diffs.
