From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 29 08:15:42 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07831106566C; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:15:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.186]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 912A08FC0C; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:15:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c211-30-171-136.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au (c211-30-171-136.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.171.136]) by mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q1T8Fb0I011532 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:15:38 +1100 Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:15:37 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Dimitry Andric In-Reply-To: <4F4DD7F3.3040903@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20120229184924.E2993@besplex.bde.org> References: <201202282145.q1SLjLpO093657@svn.freebsd.org> <4F4DD7F3.3040903@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, Giovanni Trematerra , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r232271 - head/sys/kern X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:15:42 -0000 On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 2012-02-28 23:11, Giovanni Trematerra wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote: > ... >> It introduces a style(9) violation, though. >> I think it should be in this way >> >> pipe_chmod(struct file *fp, mode_t mode, struct ucred *active_cred, >> struct thread *td) Indeed. > Is there any interest in changing the other K&R definitions in this file > to C99? Or does that cause too much churn? I tried to make this change > as minimal as possible to make it compile. It is just churn for me. > Btw, style(9) doesn't say anything about a maximum line width, maybe > that should be added explicitly...:) Everything in style(9) is supposed to be implicit if not stated explicitly, but the examples of the line length limit have been especially broken by changing it into man page. Manpage formatting adds a 5-space left margin which starts by breaking all the literal examples of indentation by tabs -- e.g., leading tabs become a leading tab followed by 5 spaces, or 13 spaces if you filter the man page through col -bx. Any examples of the limit of 79 columns look like they are broken since they became non-examples with 84 columns *the maximum length is actually 5+77, not counting bad examples due to expansion of verbose VCS ids). I recently noticed another class of breakage: there were many examples of vertical whitespace, with none between statements except always 1 blank line before most block comments in groups of statements. Changing to a man page destroyed _all_ examples of this by turning all the block comments before statements into meta-comments in man page text instead of in C comments, and by adding more meta-comments in man page text; then to make things look right, there must be blank lines separating the man page text from the C code, and you can't tell if these blank lines are part of the literal examples of C code or just mdoc formatting. 4 explicit rules about blank lines remain, and none of these is in C function. 1 explicit rule about an empty line remains, but it is about the empty line after null declarations at the beginning of a function. It goes without saying that there is a blank line after non-null declarations at the beginning of a function, but most examples of this are now indistinguishable from man page paragraph breaks and the others are hard to see. Bruce