* Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont [not found] ` <CA+55aFxaOFoh+Zrm5tNhU4hWu4Z032+nqV3vXK=QPJyhZsU3_A@mail.gmail.com> @ 2016-12-16 2:30 ` Joe Perches 2016-12-16 5:00 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Joe Perches @ 2016-12-16 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds, git, Junio C Hamano Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky, Petr Mladek, Geert Uytterhoeven, Steven Rostedt, Mark Rutland, Andrew Morton, Linux Kernel Mailing List On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 18:10 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Joe Perches <joe@perches•com> wrote: > > > > > > In fact, I thought we already upped the check-patch limit to 100? > > > > Nope, CodingStyle neither. > > > > Last time I tried was awhile ago. > > Ok, it must have been just talked about, and with the exceptions for > strings etc I may not have seen as many of the really annoying line > breaks lately. > > I don't mind a 80-column "soft limit" per se: if some code > consistently goes over 80 columns, there really is something seriously > wrong there. So 80 columns may well be the right limit for that kind > of check (or even less). Newspaper column widths were relatively small for a good reason. I think most of the uses of simple statements should be on a single line. I'd rather see just a few arguments on a single line than a dozen though. Especially those with long identifiers, functions with many arguments are just difficult to visually scan. > But if we have just a couple of lines that are longer (in a file that > is 3k+ lines), I'd rather not break those. > > I tend use "git grep" a lot, and it's much easier to see function > argument use if it's all on one line. > > Of course, some function calls really are *so* long that they have to > be broken up, but that's where the "if it's a couple of lines that go > a bit over the 80 column limit..." exception basically comes in. > > Put another way: long lines definitely aren't good. But breaking long > lines has some downsides too, so there should be a balance between the > two, rather than some black-and-white limit. > > In fact, we've seldom had cases where black-and-white limits work well. One thing that _would_ be useful is some enhancement to git grep that would look for multi-line statements more easily. The git grep -P option doesn't span lines. grep 2.5.4 was the last version that supported the -P option to grep through for multiple lines. It'd be nice to have something like git grep --code_style=c90 --function <foo> that'd show all multiple line uses/definitions/declarations of a particular function. I played with extending git grep a bit once, mostly to get the \s mechanism to span lines. It kinda worked. Still, it seems like real work to implement well. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont 2016-12-16 2:30 ` [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont Joe Perches @ 2016-12-16 5:00 ` Junio C Hamano 2016-12-16 6:04 ` Joe Perches 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2016-12-16 5:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joe Perches Cc: Linus Torvalds, git, Sergey Senozhatsky, Petr Mladek, Geert Uytterhoeven, Steven Rostedt, Mark Rutland, Andrew Morton, Linux Kernel Mailing List Joe Perches <joe@perches•com> writes: > grep 2.5.4 was the last version that supported the -P option to > grep through for multiple lines. Does anybody know why it was dropped? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont 2016-12-16 5:00 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2016-12-16 6:04 ` Joe Perches 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Joe Perches @ 2016-12-16 6:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Linus Torvalds, git, Sergey Senozhatsky, Petr Mladek, Geert Uytterhoeven, Steven Rostedt, Mark Rutland, Andrew Morton, Linux Kernel Mailing List On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 21:00 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <joe@perches•com> writes: > > > grep 2.5.4 was the last version that supported the -P option to > > grep through for multiple lines. > > Does anybody know why it was dropped? perl compatible regexes in grep have always been "experimental" and never officially supported. From the grep manual https://www.gnu.org/software/grep/manual/grep.html --perl-regexp Interpret the pattern as a Perl-compatible regular expression (PCRE). This is highly experimental, particularly when combined with the -z (--null-data) option, and ‘grep -P’ may warn of unimplemented features. See Other Options. It wasn't dropped so much as "enhanced" away. Oh well. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-12-16 6:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1481806438-30185-1-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org>
[not found] ` <20161215162336.GA18152@pathway.suse.cz>
[not found] ` <20161216013706.GA20445@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
[not found] ` <CA+55aFz3B2BfjG54z7ALOwezCHSdQp+YbFaHcJkCg=fzoKtfNg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <1481853432.29291.76.camel@perches.com>
[not found] ` <CA+55aFxaOFoh+Zrm5tNhU4hWu4Z032+nqV3vXK=QPJyhZsU3_A@mail.gmail.com>
2016-12-16 2:30 ` [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont Joe Perches
2016-12-16 5:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-12-16 6:04 ` Joe Perches
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox