On 2025-03-07 13:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 07/03/2025 10:50, Dragan Simic wrote:
Applying strict alpha-numerical ordering can result in property
lists
that
are suboptimal from the usability standpoint. For the provided
example,
which stems from a real-world DT, [2][3][4] applying strict
alpha-numerical
ordering produces the following undesirable result:
BTW, your entire commit msg still has incorrect wrapping. Please use
standard editors which understand Git commit msg style (which I
believe
is equal to Linux submitting patches).
Sorry, but what makes the wrapping wrong? I wrap patch descriptions
at or well before 78 columns, which I belive is the desired way to do
so. The longest line in this patch description is 77 characters long,
which is still below 78 characters.
Because it is not correct. Read submitting patches. Run checkpatch.
Here's what scripts/checkpatch.pl returns:
WARNING: Prefer a maximum 75 chars per line (possible unwrapped commit
description?)
#10:
the property names can result in more logical and more usable property
lists,
total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 26 lines checked
So, it's just a warning, and if I wrap that single line before
column 77, checkpatch.pl stops complaining. Thus, your earlier
broad statement that "your entire commit msg still has incorrect
wrapping" is simply wrong.
Also, please note that I don't "just use" some random editor, but I
use
a highly customized Vim setup, in which I over time wrote about 46 KB
of Vimscript code in my ~/.vimrc, all by hand. I've even contributed
smaller patches to Vim.
OK, so not random, but incorrectly configured. Different tools, same
result.
Could you, please let me know your thoughts about the actual
contents of the patch, regarding the settlement that I proposed
in my previous response?
