From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EC45A43 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 21:38:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: by wgyo15 with SMTP id o15so120115304wgy.2 for ; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 12:38:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=8i0o9Y8ekANV+Dmo/QyF+WTzGwRzbVWIWmUByhF06do=; b=FiB1rVSRmZHXsZQFTk0tAHUHFL12vF36OnJqwee4mZrW5dgdzuIxzc3ZplBpOumv3u 1wuxolSohMxbp1X7O97YYnjWK2DUzaPdGKyTU98OfIEJ2hAJIIQtWMykFOmeHZYjQMup ZqGzJb+vu8bPxzIXZglsjWRmPWthfSTM8vF8eJdYh1vJa/r+dXT1cYdO2dZqEIvUmiZP /TS7/VD9mX3ejWrIqrQNgMZ1hR2qJdyW4vSbCzp7Q1prBAQiiHI9AsWgN9N7rYLT4dvh 4K7g6xpEAJzFHzpx7XVcYf66S4+2b9w4x/SLMH1az5YR1inN1cKkmMFQhBdMU225za+j /HDA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlxQfRAUacG2b9qNe3DzSaP7KRAAqWPziVucXj2jF8pm2vvxD2vcOqQSk6gr01zcAyI3bKm MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.59.4 with SMTP id v4mr64172322wjq.54.1428608312739; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 12:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.153.130 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 12:38:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150409191658.GC26201@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <3571725.20GtF5MAnU@xps13> <0C5AFCA4B3408848ADF2A3073F7D8CC86D58F9C2@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> <20150408114339.GA22959@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <0C5AFCA4B3408848ADF2A3073F7D8CC86D58FB64@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> <20150408131105.GD22959@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <0C5AFCA4B3408848ADF2A3073F7D8CC86D58FDBF@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> <0FBA33A7-A21E-426F-B44E-32E86F2B23DB@infiniteio.com> <20150408153802.2bc59227@urahara> <20150409191658.GC26201@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:38:32 -0500 Message-ID: From: Jay Rolette To: Neil Horman Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] tools brainstorming X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 19:38:33 -0000 On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 11:31:39AM -0500, Jay Rolette wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Stephen Hemminger < > > stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 8 Apr 2015 16:29:54 -0600 > > > Jay Rolette wrote: > > > > > > > "C comments" includes //, right? It's been part of the C standard > for a > > > long time now... > > > > > > Yes but. > > > I like to use checkpatch and checkpatch enforces kernel style which > does > > > not allow // for > > > comments. > > > > > > > Fork checkpatch and disable that bit? DPDK isn't the kernel, so no > > requirement to follow all of its rules > > > > Doesn't that beg the question, why? I understand the DPDK isn't the > kernel, but > we're not talking about clarity of code, not anything functional to that > code. > It seems we would be better served by just taking something that works here > rather than re-inventing the wheel and digging into the minuate of what > type of > comments should be allowed (unless there is a compelling reason to change > it > that supercedes the avilable tools). If not checkpath, then some other > tool, > but It seems to me that coding style is one of those things where we can > bend to > the tool rather than taking the time to make the tool do exactly whats > desired, > at least until someone gets the time to modify it. > Fair question. It depends a bit on how much you want to encourage patch contributions. Is it worth adding more pain for folks trying to contribute patches for things like this? Should we force someone to spend time redoing a patch because of which way they do their parenthesis? What about number of spaces to indent code? // vs /* */ comments? None of these matter functionally and they don't affect maintenance generally. If someone is modifying existing code, then yeah, they should follow the prevailing style (indention level, brace alignment, etc.) of the file they are in. It helps readability, which makes maintenance easier. However, IMO, mixing // and /* */ for comments doesn't affect the readability of the source. I know if I submit a patch and the only feedback is that I should have used /* */ for comments, I'm extremely unlikely spend extra time to resubmit the patch for pedantry.