This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCHv3 3/4] ldbl-128: Mechanical L(x) cleanup.
On 08/26/2016 05:18 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> I don't see the point of these cleanups in patches 3 or 4. Adding spaces
> inside L() to line up decimal points in tables of figures that are
> inherently not human-readable doesn't seem like an improvement; the
> important thing to be readable is the comments explaining semantics of the
> tables of figures. Adding L() mechanically has not made the formatting
> any worse.
>
> That said: some of the changes are to tables that clearly aren't formatted
> according to the GNU Coding Standards (for example, have no indentation at
> all). In such cases, fixing to follow the GNU Coding Standards (which
> typically means two-column indentation - again, no spaces inside L(), and
> nothing to line up decimal points of positive and negative values) is
> perfectly OK, it just has nothing to do with float128 support.
If that is the general opinion of these tables, I would rather drop
these patches. The macros are mostly exaggerating formatting issues
already present. Arguably, the existing violations may make it easier
to read in some opinions.