Re: [PATCH] update checkpatch.pl to version 0.08

[Andy Whitcroft]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jul 24 2007 12:33, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>>> Warning on multiple declarations on a line is nice, but IMO really too
>>> verbose (why is "int i, j;" bad? Did C somehow change syntax today?).
>> No the normal response is two fold:
>>
>> 1) "what the heck are i and j those are meaningless names"
> 
> Can we at least assume the submitter is sane in some ways?
> i and j are picked for obvious iterater values - you would not want
> verbosify that to fruit_iterator and process_iterator or whatever
> because it's a hell lot more typing.
> It takes more than a few Perl regexes to actually grasp the semantics
> of whether "i" is useful or not.

I was mearly quoting the what I'd seen.  I am completely ambivalent on
the whole process.  I had assumed when we updated the documentation to
strongly indicate that this was a style guide not a robot with patch
veto power that people would realise they could ignore those things they
disagreed with and things would be good.	

checkpatch is only intended to tell you what a Reviewer is likely to
pick up and winge about and is intended to save _them_ time, their time
generally being more limited that yours if for no other reason than you
want your patch in, and they may have no vested interest.

That said I want it to be as unannoying as we can and we will have
loosened most of the checks you do not like in the next release.

-apw

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/