On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 15:26, Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > On 02/17/2012 08:55 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> >> Anthony Liguori<aligu...@us.ibm.com> writes: >> >>> I really hate having these discussions. I would almost rather we just >>> pay the one-time cost of re-indenting so we can stop debating about >>> this. >>> >>> For folks that feel strongly about this, please submit the following: >>> >>> An indent command that takes the tree to CODING_STYLE along with a >>> diffstat of the end result. >>> >>> Depending on how bad the diffstat is, we can consider doing this and >>> ending this set of arguments once and for all. >> >> >> The only justification for an idiosyncratic coding style I can buy is >> minimizing reindentation of old code. > > > Well this was what I was getting at in my previous comments. If we just > need to reindent < 10 files with a few random changes here and there, then > maybe that isn't so bad. > > But if we have to touch every single file in the tree in a significant way, > then no way is it justified.
One way to handle this is gradual reformatting, every time when code is touched, only changes towards common CODING_STYLE are allowed. Small, contained reformatting patches should be also allowed, for example to adjust brace style in one file a time or to remove spaces at the end of line. >> If we reindent anyway, reindent >> to something that isn't specific to the QEMU island, please. > > > I don't even want to consider something that touches every line of code. > That's effectively creating a new source tree and losing the continuity of > our SCM history. I think only 'git blame' output would be affected and that is not 100% reliable anyway, considering for example code movement. > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >