[PATCH] coding-style: Document 80 chars limit for line length
The idea is to have it like a soft limit: if possible then break lines, if not then have a long line instead of some creative approach. Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> --- docs/coding-style.rst | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/coding-style.rst b/docs/coding-style.rst index cfd7b16638..813128bfb6 100644 --- a/docs/coding-style.rst +++ b/docs/coding-style.rst @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ around operators and keywords: indent-libvirt() { - indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l75 -lc75 \ + indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l80 -lc80 \ -sbi4 -psl -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -ss -sc -cdw -cli4 -npcs -nbc \ --no-tabs "$@" } @@ -141,6 +141,18 @@ further, by piping it through ``expand -i``, since some leading TABs can get through. Usually they're in macro definitions or strings, and should be converted anyhow. +The recommended length for lines is 80 characters, but common sense +should prevail. It may get tricky around some names (because of how +Libvirt constructs names for functions/enums/etc.) + +:: + + foo( + arg1, arg2 + ); // Bad + foo(arg1, + arg2); // Good + Libvirt requires a C99 compiler for various reasons. However, most of the code base prefers to stick to C89 syntax unless there is a compelling reason otherwise. For example, it is preferable to use -- 2.26.2
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 01:58:24PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
The idea is to have it like a soft limit: if possible then break lines, if not then have a long line instead of some creative approach.
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> --- docs/coding-style.rst | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/docs/coding-style.rst b/docs/coding-style.rst index cfd7b16638..813128bfb6 100644 --- a/docs/coding-style.rst +++ b/docs/coding-style.rst @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ around operators and keywords:
indent-libvirt() { - indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l75 -lc75 \ + indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l80 -lc80 \
The indent tool enforces line length no matter what....
-sbi4 -psl -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -ss -sc -cdw -cli4 -npcs -nbc \ --no-tabs "$@" } @@ -141,6 +141,18 @@ further, by piping it through ``expand -i``, since some leading TABs can get through. Usually they're in macro definitions or strings, and should be converted anyhow.
+The recommended length for lines is 80 characters, but common sense +should prevail. It may get tricky around some names (because of how +Libvirt constructs names for functions/enums/etc.)
but this is a mere recommendation. IMHO we should say "The maximum permitted line length is 100 characters, but lines should aim to be approximately 80 characters." and then use -l100 for indent Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
On 12/2/20 11:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 01:58:24PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
The idea is to have it like a soft limit: if possible then break lines, if not then have a long line instead of some creative approach.
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> --- docs/coding-style.rst | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/docs/coding-style.rst b/docs/coding-style.rst index cfd7b16638..813128bfb6 100644 --- a/docs/coding-style.rst +++ b/docs/coding-style.rst @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ around operators and keywords:
indent-libvirt() { - indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l75 -lc75 \ + indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l80 -lc80 \
The indent tool enforces line length no matter what....
Yeah, it's not perfect, but I am no friend with gnu indent so I don't know how to specify hard and soft limits and quick skim through manpage did not suggest it's possible.
-sbi4 -psl -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -ss -sc -cdw -cli4 -npcs -nbc \ --no-tabs "$@" } @@ -141,6 +141,18 @@ further, by piping it through ``expand -i``, since some leading TABs can get through. Usually they're in macro definitions or strings, and should be converted anyhow.
+The recommended length for lines is 80 characters, but common sense +should prevail. It may get tricky around some names (because of how +Libvirt constructs names for functions/enums/etc.)
but this is a mere recommendation.
IMHO we should say
"The maximum permitted line length is 100 characters, but lines should aim to be approximately 80 characters."
and then use -l100 for indent
Works for me. Thomas, since you suggested we document this, does this wording sound reasonable to you? If so, I will post v2. Michal
On 02/12/2020 12.20, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 12/2/20 11:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 01:58:24PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
The idea is to have it like a soft limit: if possible then break lines, if not then have a long line instead of some creative approach.
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> --- docs/coding-style.rst | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/docs/coding-style.rst b/docs/coding-style.rst index cfd7b16638..813128bfb6 100644 --- a/docs/coding-style.rst +++ b/docs/coding-style.rst @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ around operators and keywords: indent-libvirt() { - indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l75 -lc75 \ + indent -bad -bap -bbb -bli4 -br -ce -brs -cs -i4 -l80 -lc80 \
The indent tool enforces line length no matter what....
Yeah, it's not perfect, but I am no friend with gnu indent so I don't know how to specify hard and soft limits and quick skim through manpage did not suggest it's possible.
-sbi4 -psl -saf -sai -saw -sbi4 -ss -sc -cdw -cli4 -npcs -nbc \ --no-tabs "$@" } @@ -141,6 +141,18 @@ further, by piping it through ``expand -i``, since some leading TABs can get through. Usually they're in macro definitions or strings, and should be converted anyhow. +The recommended length for lines is 80 characters, but common sense +should prevail. It may get tricky around some names (because of how +Libvirt constructs names for functions/enums/etc.)
but this is a mere recommendation.
IMHO we should say
"The maximum permitted line length is 100 characters, but lines should aim to be approximately 80 characters."
and then use -l100 for indent
Works for me. Thomas, since you suggested we document this, does this wording sound reasonable to you? If so, I will post v2.
Yes, I think using -l100 for indent and saying that 80 is preferred is better! Thanks for tackling this! Thomas
participants (3)
-
Daniel P. Berrangé -
Michal Privoznik -
Thomas Huth