[Buildroot] [PATCH 00 of 15] packages: rename FOO_BAR_OPT into FOO_BAR_OPTS
Thomas Petazzoni
thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com
Sun Oct 5 11:07:44 UTC 2014
Dear Yann E. MORIN,
On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 11:17:35 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > On those ones, I must say I'm not sure. Do we really have a coding
> > style for line continuation characters? In some cases, I found the
> > original code (i.e before your patch) to actually be nicer than after
> > your change.
>
> Well, I do like alignment of \, because it is easier to see the lines
> are a single block.
I also personally like the alignment of \, so I tend to disagree a bit
with the patch removing this.
Regarding the alignment of =, my point of view is that there are
different cases. Within packages, I agree it probably doesn't make much
sense to align = signs. However, within the core infrastructure, there
are situations where it really make seems more "beautiful" to read.
> Being consistent is nice. However, I find a bulk clean-up is very
> complex to do:
>
> - as you found, some assignments were not cleaned-up; it is difficult
> to find a pattern that matches all cases, and has no false-positives;
>
> - it is difficult to review, because of the sheer amount of changes in
> a single patch.
>
> So I would prefer we fix offenders whenever there is another patch being
> done for it. For example, when a version is bumped, a preliminary patch
> would introduce the cleanup (with the first two changes possibly being
> conflated in a single patch if it is easy to review):
>
> foo: remove backslash alignment
> foo: remove assignments alignment
> foo: bump version
>
> This is something very easy to do, and review.
I agree.
Summary: I mark as rejected those two patches?
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
More information about the buildroot
mailing list