From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com (mail-wm0-f65.google.com [74.125.82.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D747B200 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:26:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id n138so1929052wmg.2 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:26:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=qosKoedgOENqGDQM5FK97w/UUcP1m/SnNEdxfGgvRVI=; b=kfSZ76VR4OqKCfk2gHLqCExi++yAlTUDmZUtuh4BX7Y3ySRBb7XeSUtiYaZU1v8NAT u5Rtd8wpPd0xD7tnmR+i1mbQj0ryiWXxrNh13CQI4Y2zQWCORHShb5kH+dnmRnVAIunT OEV5hxQTUpnRG1iWgwfgMxBv5bY6Pj/6ezZQlZTk/q1ohpjCmu1IoKdHKpbC65w1UsAH hyE3xBU1zAtBLAbbdtSYxCFdMY9FR+T19vDF2CQceTlAiQx4xJawq37Ng25iGHQawZ7V woguDNVvM0KpFlWgjDmSfgn1QHPfRHKxFpETJhHaaFsrqXz5j1ExpXuXtciq0qXRlahH ke9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=qosKoedgOENqGDQM5FK97w/UUcP1m/SnNEdxfGgvRVI=; b=kE9U7VhlIiTG8yGpdEy3AbUBOxeJXG/18M9jWExxI8T/R+5zos23yxIj7Py8qXUgmJ 9Zm92+vDGmIy5aDcLn2WripGTg86OnmLo5UQCbFCNBrcmPY26vFzzmqH7L/1VywMhry6 n1OxLU5D5aNe9Lo+Vl7pIz/9/n9WvM/hLsckC7bae6Vu4GZsHfNPFlBbkH3J09iX/Qs9 Z+fzet563T3/qz6GToUAag1yiV3prB+t8LG5H6NRWtECpz8ZNsAVgQvXmEWzLcbn9U7F yiX7g6QyVIAMciH4NxGM4fmrZftCxRl8z+3NEhiVj+m0HQNzP059DrH6jq1PJn7hsdqY ueag== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mJjM2UXnocL1tik2/BbotmYUo1RuDtwgI1XFTRsswHaDTvuXdfS flygc9rBWX5nhWFjg0Pm7kpG X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotSJoh7LNZXalZTNIluL2lidM0WoT8SEO8hkZ6VKAWsQByqQgKIH7nS/l1RDDuW+L1DByQ7uA== X-Received: by 10.28.19.195 with SMTP id 186mr2606082wmt.20.1513671981862; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:26:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e46sm13655847edb.93.2017.12.19.00.26.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:26:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:25:36 +0100 From: Nelio Laranjeiro To: "Wiles, Keith" Cc: Adrien Mazarguil , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Stephen Hemminger Message-ID: <20171219082536.wojt26lpzft6fdof@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> References: <20171124172132.GW4062@6wind.com> <20171218162443.12971-1-adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> <20171218162443.12971-3-adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> <20171218175900.GC4062@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/3] net/hyperv: implement core functionality X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 08:26:23 -0000 Hi Keith, On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:43:35PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > > > On Dec 18, 2017, at 11:59 AM, Adrien Mazarguil wrote: > > >> Not to criticize style, but a few blank lines could help in > >> readability for these files IMHO. Unless blank lines are illegal > >> :-) > > > > It's a matter of taste, I think people tend to add random blank lines where > > they think doing so clarifies things for themselves, resulting in > > inconsistent coding style not much clearer for everyone after several > > iterations. > > > > As a maintainer I've grown tired of discussions related to blank lines while > > reviewing patches. That's why except for a few special cases, I now enforce > > exactly the bare minimum of one blank line between variable declarations and > > the rest of the code inside each block. > > > > If doing so makes a function unreadable then perhaps it needs to be split :) > > I'm sure you'll understand! > > I do not really understand the problem as I have not seen any > complaints about blank lines unless two or more in a row. I have never > seen someone complain about a given blank line in a function, unless a > missing one to split up the declared variables and code in a function > or block of code. It is true when the amount of blank lines are few and logical, but we generally see patch where in the same file we see random blank lines added without any logic, generally to easily identify where the modification are done. > It is a shame you have decided to take the minimum approach to blank > lines, IMO it does not make a lot of sense. I only bring it up to help > others with reading your code like our customers. > > We do not have rule for this so I can not force anyone to add blank > lines for readability, so I have to live with it. :-( As there is no clear rules, the best one is limiting this situation to the extreme minimal, otherwise explaining the logic behind it is very difficult as it will differ from one maintainer to another one, it will increase the amount of patches refused due to coding style issues. > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Adrien Mazarguil > > 6WIND > > Regards, > Keith > Regards, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND