On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 21:07 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> I feel like the lustre headers could be fit into 80 characters without
> losing very much.
Maybe.
> No one uses the complicated options on checkpatch anyway, they just grep
> away the warnings they don't like.
That'd be false. Other proj
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 11:13:31AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 21:07 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > No one uses the complicated options on checkpatch anyway, they just grep
> > away the warnings they don't like.
>
> That'd be false. Other projects like u-boot do.
Ah. Ok.
I feel like the lustre headers could be fit into 80 characters without
losing very much.
No one uses the complicated options on checkpatch anyway, they just grep
away the warnings they don't like. Newbies especially don't use them.
regards,
dan carpenter
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 13:32 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2015, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Many lines of code extend beyond the maximum line length.
> > Some of these are possibly justified by use type.
> >
> > For instance:
> >
> > structure definitions where comments are added per membe
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Joe Perches wrote:
> Many lines of code extend beyond the maximum line length.
> Some of these are possibly justified by use type.
>
> For instance:
>
> structure definitions where comments are added per member like
>
> struct foo {
> type member;/* some lo
Many lines of code extend beyond the maximum line length.
Some of these are possibly justified by use type.
For instance:
structure definitions where comments are added per member like
struct foo {
type member;/* some long description */
}
And lines that don't fit the typica
