On 30.05.2022 11:41, Julien Grall wrote: > > > On 30/05/2022 10:33, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 30.05.2022 11:27, Julien Grall wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 30/05/2022 10:16, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 30.05.2022 11:12, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>> On 28/05/2022 00:16, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>>>>> """ >>>>>> It is possible that in specific circumstances it is best not to follow a >>>>>> rule because it is not possible or because the alternative leads to >>>>>> better code quality. Those cases are called "deviations". They are >>>>>> permissible as long as they are documented, either as an in-code comment >>>>>> or as part of the commit message. Other documentation mechanisms are >>>>> >>>>> I would drop the "as part of the commit message" because it is a lot >>>>> more difficult to associate the deviation with a rationale (the code may >>>>> have been moved and you would need to go through the history). >>>> >>>> But this was added in response to me pointing out that code comments >>>> aren't standardized yet as to their format. The alternative, as said >>>> before, would be to come up with a scheme first, before starting to >>>> mandate playing by certain of the rules (and hence requiring deviations >>>> to be documented). >>> >>> I don't think this is necessary short term. It is easy to rework a >>> comment after the fact. It is a lot more difficult to go through the >>> history and find the rationale. >> >> We all know what "short term" may mean - we may remain in this mode of >> operation for an extended period of time. It'll potentially be quite a >> bit of churn to subsequently adjust all such comments which would >> have accumulated, and - for not being standardized - can't easily be >> grep-ed for. > > Well... Scanner will likely point out the issues we deviate from. So you > we have an easy way to know where the comments need to be adjusted. > >> By documenting things in the commit message the state of >> the code base doesn't change, and we'll continue to rely on scanners >> to locate sets of candidates for adjustment or deviation commentary. > > The part I am missing how documenting the deviations in the commit > message help... Can you clarify it?
I understood Stefano for this to merely be for the purpose of justifying the deviation (preempting review comments). Jan
