Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 20:45:30 +0800
From: Kai Zhao <loverszhao@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Coding Style

> BTW I am tempted to officially have Jumbo deviate from core's tab width
> recommentdation, using 4 instead of 8. With the "indent with TABs, align
> with spaces" requirement (which I'm prepared to kill for) this only
> affects how long a line gets[*].

> Also, I think we should document that we use "tab for indent, space for
> align" as in http://emacswiki.org/emacs/SmartTabs.

Do you prepare to kill the rule "tab for indent, space for align" ?

> I can relate to that and for core this is a good decision. But in Jumbo
> we live with lots of external things: Macros like
> CL_DEVICE_PREFERRED_VECTOR_WIDTH_CHAR and functions like
> clCreateProgramWithBinary(). Not to mention AMD's ADL. We get crazy
> long lines without writing code that should be split to more functions.
> Actually for OpenCL host code I often just give up and let it span
> several lines.

Do you think we can solve this problem by allowing to exceed column 80
in such cases while the tab-width is still 8-character?


Thanks,

Kai

[ CONTENT OF TYPE text/html SKIPPED ]

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ