On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 02:04:37PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > 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. > This isn't a valid example, as it wasn't written by a human. This is the result of Lindent being run blindly on the file and nothing more. Try again. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
