On Sun, 22 Aug 2010, Blue Swirl wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Jes Sorensen <jes.soren...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 08/21/10 16:03, Blue Swirl wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> > >> wrote: > >>> Could be "fun" for developers using Windows. If they exist. > >> > >> At least OCaml site offers binary download for Windows. I didn't > >> compile Coccinelle myself, so I don't know how much that helps. > > > > I know nothing about Coccinelle, but I did find that yum knew where to > > get it. However, that said, I think we should try to avoid depending on > > exotic tools that may not exist on OSes which may be used by developers. > > What about OSX? > > Same thing, binary for OCaml exists. There's none for *BSD or *Solaris, > though.
FWIW OCaml is bootstrapable using only C. > >>>>> Even a working patch checking tool can only address the last issue > >>>>> (haphazard enforcement), not the other ones. You may not care. > >>>> > >>>> Which other ones? > >>> > >>> Quoting myself: > >>> > >>> [...] the current CODING_STYLE is > >>> idiosyncratic, > >> > >> Personal preference. I liked Fabrice's style but I also like current > >> style. I would probably like Linux style except for the LISPisms. I > >> don't like GNU or Java style. > > > > My favorite quote from the Linux kernel coding style: > > "First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding standards, > > and NOT read it. Burn them, it's a great symbolic gesture." :) > > > >>> While wasting time for historical reasons is certainly better than > >>> wasting time for the heck of it, it's arguably worse than stopping the > >>> waste. > >> > >> But how would you do that? Drop the CODING_STYLE (and accept > >> anything)? Switch to a new CODING_STYLE that is widely appreciated and > >> so all bikeshedding will cease? Enforce current style? > > > > I would suggest we either clean up the existing rule, or switch to the > > Linux kernel style, with the explicit exemption that existing code can > > keep the 4-char indentation, unless the whole file is converted. I'd > > like to avoid a total reformatting of the codebase, but we could look at > > it on a file by file base if it becomes relevant. > > Sounds reasonable. > Doesn't to me. -- mailto:av1...@comtv.ru