Ian Romanick <[email protected]> writes: > On 10/25/2018 05:13 AM, Eric Engestrom wrote: >> On Thursday, 2018-10-25 17:54:16 +1100, Timothy Arceri wrote: >>> On 25/10/18 7:42 am, Ian Romanick wrote: >>>> On 10/23/2018 04:15 AM, Eric Engestrom wrote: >>>>> Suggested-by: Timothy Arceri <[email protected]> >>> >>> Um no :P I suggested you fix the formatting in your patch to match the Mesa >>> style. >> >> Right, sorry, you suggested fixing the formatting, but not the fix >> I went with, so I should've dropped this tag. >> >>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <[email protected]> >>>>> --- >>>>> Timothy, I opted to remove them all instead of adding even more, as it >>>>> would break again next time something changes (the set_foreach() one was >>>>> already broken before my patch for instance) and result in lots of >>>>> unnecessary churn for seemingly no gain, and I don't like hiding the >>>>> backslash away (it hinders readability). >>>> >>>> NAK... we use this formatting everywhere in Mesa. The point is to move >>>> the \ characters out of the way. When you're trying to read a >>>> multi-line macro, they are distracting, so it is nice to move them over. >> >> I don't have the same opinion, but respecting mesa style is the point >> here, so I added those whitespace chars, squashed them in the previous >> patches, and pushed them. >> >> Sorry for this patch :) > > It's always worth a try. :) Everyone has aspects of the Mesa style that > they don't like. Sending out a patch like this is a good way to test > the waters about changing the style. It does happen from time to time. > It's better to do it like this than to try to sneak it in a big patch > series.
I would love to see this style change. emacs in my experience does horrible things to these weird (inconsistently-)aligned \s, so I have to manually align them and fail.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
