On 04/01/2011 12:01 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:55:39AM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
I'd prefer to only document "strict" guidelines, and treat
checkpatch.pl warnings ("suggestions") as an extra "reward" you get
for taking the time to run it.
I don't want to be punished for running checkpatch.pl like I'm supposed
to while those who don't can get away with more.
You're not! These are extra morsels of goodness :)
A --pedantic mode would be fine although probably no one besides the
author would use it :).
True :) But you're right, this is probably the better approach. How bout:
--warnings: print coding style warnings in addition to errors, and exit
failure if encountered
Then default to suppressing warning statements, and --no-fail-on-warn
behavior.
The stuff that gets reported by the default invocation needs to matter,
otherwise checkpatch.pl isn't useful and people will bypass it.
Stefan
