On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 12:17 -0400, Jason Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:02:15AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 15:59 +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:
> > > I agree that a creeping list of exceptions where CamelCase
> > > is to be overlooked would be bad, but I would argue
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:02:15AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 15:59 +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:
> > I agree that a creeping list of exceptions where CamelCase
> > is to be overlooked would be bad, but I would argue that
> > perhaps my exceptions aren't actual CamelCase - they
On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 15:59 +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:
> I agree that a creeping list of exceptions where CamelCase
> is to be overlooked would be bad, but I would argue that
> perhaps my exceptions aren't actual CamelCase - they're
> (pretending to be) SI units, and just happen to match the
> Cam
Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 14:02 +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:
> > I don't think anyone really has an issue with things like max_mV.
> > And whilst nS et al. may not be SI standard, at least it's clear
> > what they represent.
> []
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/check
On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 14:02 +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:
> I don't think anyone really has an issue with things like max_mV.
> And whilst nS et al. may not be SI standard, at least it's clear
> what they represent.
[]
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -2940,6 +2940,
5 matches
Mail list logo
