qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CODING_STYLE: Define our preferred form for mul


From: Kevin Wolf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CODING_STYLE: Define our preferred form for multiline comments
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:22:18 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)

I'm late to the party, but anyway...

Am 07.06.2018 um 14:02 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben:
> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On 5 June 2018 at 08:46, Cornelia Huck <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 06:33:22 +0200
> >> Thomas Huth <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>> On 05.06.2018 03:17, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>> > On Mon,  4 Jun 2018 17:21:40 +0100
> >>> > Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>> >> +Multiline comments blocks should have a row of stars on the left
> >>> >> +and the terminating */ on its own line:
> >>> >> +    /* like
> >>> >> +     * this
> >>> >> +     */
> 
> Uh, winging just one end of the comment offends my eyes.

+1, this is the ugliest style of all.

> >>> >> +Putting the initial /* on its own line is accepted, but not required.
> >>> >
> >>> > Could we say "at maintainer discretion", or is that always implied?  The
> >>> > asymmetry of the proposed standard is not my favorite and a mostly
> >>> > blank line before and after further supports standing out from
> >>> > surrounding code.
> >>> I also don't like the asymmetry. I'd prefer more dense comments, though:
> >>>
> >>>   /* like
> >>>    * this */
> >
> > Wow, I think that looks terrible :-)
> 
> Even more terrible, you wanted to say ;)

I actually prefer this one for short (2 or 3 lines) not too important
comments in order to save some screen space.

For longer or important comments, it's kernel-style.

> >>> Anyway, could we either use that dense format or the kernel-style
> >>> multi-lines-comment format, please? Mixing it asymmetrically is just ugly.
> >>
> >> I'd vote for the kernel style, then.
> >
> > I don't particularly object to the kernel style (though it's not
> > how I personally default to writing comments). I just didn't want
> > to rule a huge chunk of our existing comments as out-of-standard
> > for what I see as a relatively minor divergence in form --
> > we do have a lot of no-leading-separate-/* comments. I can live
> > with mandating kernel-style if it means we can rule out GNU-form
> > and other weirdnesses though :-)
> 
> Let's mandate kernel-style for new code.  I could live with giving
> maintainers license to tolerate certain other styles.  The fewer, the
> better, though.

Kernel-style + give maintainers license to tolerate more compact forms
(mostly for short comments) works for me.

Kevin



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]