On Fri, 2021-12-24 at 10:22 +0100, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > Hi Joe hi again. > On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 12:13:10PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Thu, 2021-12-23 at 19:48 +0100, Jacopo Mondi wrote: > > > The media subsystem requires to validate patches with > > > > > > ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict --max-line-length=80 > > > > > > We longly debated this and I believe it's now generally accepted to go > > > over 80 when it makes sense, but not regularly span to 120 cols like > > > in the previous version. > > > > Where is this documented and do you have a link to the debate? > > It's in the subsystem maintainer profile > Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > Where of course some exceptions are listed but it's anyway enforced > that "efforts should be made towards staying within 80 > characters per line" > > - on strings, as they shouldn't be broken due to line length limits; > - when a function or variable name need to have a big identifier name, > which keeps hard to honor the 80 columns limit; > - on arithmetic expressions, when breaking lines makes them harder to > read; > - when they avoid a line to end with an open parenthesis or an open > bracket. > > The debate I mentioned was specifically on the previous version of the > driver where me and Krzysztof shown quite different understanding of > coding style requirements. > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/patch/m3fstfoexa.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxx/ Thanks for that. > That lead me to submit this > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/patch/20211013092005.14268-1-jacopo@xxxxxxxxxx/ That too. FWIW, I believe using more than 100 columns or so makes it more difficult to track quickly and efficiently to the next line. Reading with multiple visual saccades on a single line is slow. And IMO: o reverse xmas tree declarations is quite a poor style requirement o single line c99 // comments should be encouraged/preferred o identifiers longer than 20 characters or so should be discouraged
