Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add support for r6040 NIC

[Edgar E. Iglesias]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 06:46:37PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Edgar E. Iglesias
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:06:11AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> On 08/31/2011 09:35 AM, malc wrote:
> >> >On Wed, 31 Aug 2011, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Upper case field names are not okay.  If you think coding style isn't 
> >> >>clear,
> >> >>that's a bug in coding style.
> >> >
> >> >Sez hu? Coding style is garbage that should be thrown out of the window.
> >> >As for looking, yeah, i'm looking at usb with it's lovely hungarian
> >> >fields, should we stampede to "fix" it?
> >> >
> >> >If the one who's going to maintain the code is fine with whatever naming
> >> >is used so be it.
> >>
> >> No.  That's how we got into the coding style mess we're in in the
> >> first place.
> >
> > TBH, the codingstyle in QEMU is the least of "problems" we are facing.
> > We've got lack of documentation, lack of tests, lack of contributors,
> > etc, etc. IMO, those bring codingstyle issues into the pretty much
> > neglectable space.
> 
> The issues you mention are real, but problems in those areas do not
> make the case for consistency invalid. We could also make rules for
> documentation. For example, must use doxygen decorations for APIs,
> must add a file under docs/apis/ when adding an API, must convert old
> APIs when adding new ones etc.
> 
> Another way would be to downscale the project to match the resources,
> we should throw away code which is not maintained and then focus on
> the good parts.
>
> > I think we should throw out everything from CS beyond the details of
> > spaces and braces. Maybe keep the 80 char limit.
> 
> I disagree, those rules try to make the code consistent. I don't care
> much what is the standard (could be Linux kernel style for example),
> but maintaining the style improves readability and maintainability of
> the code.

I agree with you to some extent, but consistent code is relative. I dont
like seeing patches rejected based on details that IMO don't matter.
Of course, what doesn't matter to me, may matter to others. So I accept it
and go on... :)

I guess that my point is that the improvments in readabilty and
maintainnability we get for example on dictating camel case here and there
but not on other places is so minimal that the focus we loose and time
we spend on looking for those, makes it not worth it.

At the moment I'm happy with just seeing that CODING_STYLE doesn't grow
though.

Cheers