On Sat, 2017-04-01 at 05:08 +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 08:52:50PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > MILD SUGGESTION: don't spell the function name out in format strings; > > > "this_function: foo is %d", n > > > might be better off as > > > "%s: foo is %d", __func__, n > > > in case you ever move it to another function or rename your function. > > > > Thank you sir, may I have another. > > > > checkpatch messages are single line. > > Too bad... Incidentally, being able to get more detailed explanation of > a warning might be a serious improvement, especially if it contains > the rationale. Hell, something like TeX handling of errors might be > a good idea - warning printed, offered actions include 'give more help', > 'continue', 'exit', 'from now on suppress this kind of warning', 'from > now on just dump this kind of warning into log and keep going', 'from > now on dump all warnings into log and keep going'. Well, there is the possibility to have longer messages. It's just the --terse option has to be somewhat sensible. > And yes, I'm serious about having something like "mild suggestion" as > possible severity - people are using that thing to look for potential > improvements to make and 'such and such change might be useful for such > and such reasons' is a lot more useful than 'this needs to be thus because > it must be thus or I'll keep warning'. I agree about checkpatch and ERROR/WARNING/CHECK vs some other wording. https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/27/180 https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/16/568 The other thing that might help is for people to take the warnings the script produces less seriously. Maybe convert: ERROR -> defect WARNING -> unstylish CHECK -> nitpick or some such. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
