Re: [PATCH v1 05/26] qemu_domain_address: Reformat qemuDomainAssignS390Addresses()

On 11/30/20 10:38 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 27/11/2020 16.02, Michal Privoznik wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com&gt; >> --- >>   src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c | 10 ++++------ >>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c b/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c >> index 2788dc7fb3..d872f75b38 100644 >> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c >> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_domain_address.c >> @@ -408,18 +408,16 @@ qemuDomainAssignS390Addresses(virDomainDefPtr def, >>       if (qemuDomainIsS390CCW(def) && >>           virQEMUCapsGet(qemuCaps, QEMU_CAPS_CCW)) { >>           if (virQEMUCapsGet(qemuCaps, QEMU_CAPS_DEVICE_VFIO_CCW)) >> -            qemuDomainPrimeVfioDeviceAddresses( >> -                def, VIR_DOMAIN_DEVICE_ADDRESS_TYPE_CCW); >> -        qemuDomainPrimeVirtioDeviceAddresses( >> -            def, VIR_DOMAIN_DEVICE_ADDRESS_TYPE_CCW); >> +            qemuDomainPrimeVfioDeviceAddresses(def, >> VIR_DOMAIN_DEVICE_ADDRESS_TYPE_CCW); > > Looks fine to me, but docs/coding-style.rst still suggest to format code > with "indent -l75", so is this really the right thing to do here? It's true that we have 80 characters limit, but that is more of a soft limit and common sense should be used. Personally, I find    func( arg1, arg2 ); worse than exceeding that 80 char rule. My common sense tells me that the rule tries to avoid the following pattern (among others):   func(arg1, arg2, ...., very_long_list_of_arguments, which, could, easily, go_on_multiple_lines, but, didnt);