Removing from CC list: - devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (this is the old address, it forwards to driverdev-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx now I believe). - Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, should we be spamming these guys with checkpatch fixing discussions? Please do correct me if this is not the correct etiquette, I am still learning also. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:49:41AM +0300, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: > Hi Tobin, > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Tobin C. Harding <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 07:53:18AM -0700, Stephen Brennan wrote: > >> Simply break down some long lines and tab-indent them. > > > > Hi Stephen, > > > > Welcome to the Linux kernel. Great that you have put in a patch, you are, however, unlikely to see > > success fixing 'line over 80' warnings. There are a bunch of arguments for and against the line over > > 80 limit, a web search will surely show them to you. The TL;DR is that it these changes do not > > _really_ improve the readability of the code, they are just changes to quiet the static analysis > > tool. > > I completely agree with you that the end target is more readable code > and that lines over 80 char is > only a symptom but I do think in this case there is something useful to do. > > Perhaps, if Stephen is willing, re-write the code to be more readable Oh, refactoring, that's a whole 'nother story. I'm a huge fan. And I agree with you that that is the correct way to deal with 'line over 80' warnings. For me, it helped to get a few _trivial_ checkpatch fixes in before I moved onto refactoring. 'line over 80' warnings are great to fix if viewed as an opportunity to refactor but not so great if viewed as a trivial white space fix to get started with. thanks, Tobin. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
