On Thu, 17 Dec 2009, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > I like this patch, this is actually what I wanted to do. > > > > I have nothing against a switch, but it had better default to off. > > > > The whole 80-char limit is insane. It results in insane "fixes". Just > > about every time somebody "improves" a patch due to the warning, the > > result is worse than the original patch. > > Examples? :) balance_leaf() in fs/reiserfs/do_balan.c Example picked totally at random: set_le_ih_k_offset(ih, le_ih_k_offset(ih) + (tb-> lbytes << (is_indirect_le_ih (ih) ? tb->tb_sb-> s_blocksize_bits - UNFM_P_SHIFT : 0))); See how everything is nicely aligned to 80 cols? Generally, don't look at this function after having a good lunch you want to keep. You have been warned. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
