On Thu, 2019-01-03 at 18:12 -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: +AD4 On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 04:39:57PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote: +AD4 +AD4 +AEAAQA -571,50 +-571,11 +AEAAQA item, explaining its use. +AD4 +AD4 9) You've made a mess of it +AD4 +AD4 --------------------------- +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 -That's OK, we all do. You've probably been told by your long-time Unix +AD4 +AD4 -user helper that +AGAAYA-GNU emacs+AGAAYA automatically formats the C sources for +AD4 +AD4 -you, and you've noticed that yes, it does do that, but the defaults it +AD4 +AD4 -uses are less than desirable (in fact, they are worse than random +AD4 +AD4 -typing - an infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never +AD4 +AD4 -make a good program). +AD4 +AD4 I feel like this patch makes the mistake a lot of doc patches do ... it +AD4 removes some of the whimsical humourous comments that have been with +AD4 us for years. I don't think this paragraph needs to be changed in +AD4 the slightest. +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 -So, you can either get rid of GNU emacs, or change it to use saner +AD4 +AD4 -values. To do the latter, you can stick the following in your .emacs file: +AD4 +AD4 - +AD4 +AD4 +AFs...+AF0 +AD4 +AD4 - +AD4 +AD4 -This will make emacs go better with the kernel coding style for C +AD4 +AD4 -files below +AGAAYAB+-/src/linux-trees+AGAAYA. +AD4 +AD4 +-+AGAAYA-GNU emacs+AGAAYA automatically formats the C sources for you. However, +AD4 +AD4 +-the defaults it uses are less than desirable. Use a version of emacs +AD4 +AD4 +-that support directory local variables such that it automatically +AD4 +AD4 +-picks up the settings from .dir-locals.el in the kernel top level +AD4 +AD4 +-directory. +AD4 +AD4 How about: +AD4 +AD4 So, you can either get rid of GNU emacs, or change it to use saner +AD4 defaults. Versions of emacs since +AFs...+AF0 support directory local +AD4 variables and will pick up the settings from .dir-locals.el in the +AD4 kernel top level directory. Hi Matthew, Thanks for having taken a look. I had removed the first paragraph of section 9 since it seemed more negative than humouristic to me. Anyway, I will make the change that you proposed. Bart.
