Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v11 5/9] xen/x86: use DECLARE_BOUNDS as required

[Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 08/03/2019 09:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx> 03/07/19 3:02 PM >>>
>> Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [PATCH v11 5/9] xen/x86: use DECLARE_BOUNDS 
>> as required"):
>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> Is the line wrapping really needed here?
>>>
>>> It would end at 80 characters exactly otherwise. I am happy to do as you
>>> prefer.
>>
>> Certainly I prefer lines to end strictly less than 80 characters and
>> preferably even shorter.  My mailer/editor produces wrap damage for
>> exactly-80-character lines.
>>
>> I think this wrapping was introduced by Stefano after a prompt from
>> me.
>>
>> Jan, it is quite unfortunate that you are replying to Stefano to
>> disagree with things that Stefano did because I suggested them, rather
>> than replying to my patch comments.  We must not put Stefano in the
>> middle of a disagreement between different committers.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I may have easily overlooked this earlier comment of yours.
> Anyway, a later reply by Stefano suggests that the line would end up
> being 79 chars, which is in line with ./CODING_STYLE.
> 
> 
>> On this style question, while I have an opinion, I don't consider
>> myself a maintainer, so the hypervisor maintainers' answer is
>> definitive.
>>
>>
>> Nevertheless, I will have one go at trying to convince Jan:
>>
>> Note that:
>>
>> - When code is turned into a patch, an extra character is added for
>> the diff +/-.  That means that 80-column code becomes 81 columns
>> wide.
>>
>> - When a patch is quoted for review in email, two (usually) extra
>> quoting characters are added ('> ') for each level of reply,
>> so 80-column code becomes 83 or 85 (or more) columns wide.
>>
>> - One purpose of the line length limit is to fit within a
>> conventional 80-column text terminal window (or at least, to
>> minimise the number of lines which overflow such a window)
>>
>> - In an 80 column ssh session, simple representations are only
>> capable of unambiguously displaying lines of up to 79 characters.
>>
>> - Therefore the total available code width which can be displayed
>> unambiguously in an 80-column ssh session, within a singly quoted
>> patch, is 76 characters.  Longer lines produce wrap damage.
>>
>> To me would seem to imply that a *code* line length limit of 76 or 74
>> characters should be usual.  Certainly it seems churlish to object to
>> patches where the new code is wrapped to avoid lines >76.
> 
> ./CODING_STYLE is pretty clear about it being "less than 80 characters".
> If you want a lower limit, I think you'd have to propose a patch to that file
> (which I'd likely try to prevent from going in). Wrapping in particular 
> for(;;)
> (as was the case here iirc) is always weighing length vs readability. I for
> one consider for(;;) easier to read when it's all on one line. Therefore I'd
> prefer if no "early" wrapping was done. But as always - if a majority thinks
> differently, so be it.

-2 for lowering the limit.


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel