This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] ChangeLog width 74 -> 80
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:09:29 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] ChangeLog width 74 -> 80
- References: <20130618150401 dot GA24795 at host2 dot jankratochvil dot net> <51C07B94 dot 3080606 at redhat dot com> <20130618153005 dot GA26742 at host2 dot jankratochvil dot net> <51C07FCC dot 6090706 at redhat dot com> <20130618154752 dot GA27499 at host2 dot jankratochvil dot net>
On 06/18/2013 04:47 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:42:04 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> Nobody said anything about bugs. Nor is emacs a non-modern editor.
>
> I do not understand why you have mentioned Emacs in the first place, it seems
> irrelevant for GDB development.
Aw, come on, you serious?
The patch does:
--- a/gdb/ChangeLog
+++ b/gdb/ChangeLog
@@ -7060,7 +7060,7 @@ For older changes see ChangeLog-2012.
Local Variables:
mode: change-log
left-margin: 8
-fill-column: 74
+fill-column: 80
You surely know that's an emacs setting. And I said:
"74 is the default column width in emacs' changelog mode,
so it seems the explicit setting is just trying to making
sure everyone (that uses emacs) is using the default width,
even if one has it overridden in their .emacs file."
There's your connection.
And we were chatting on irc about where does the 74 come
from too...
> I find correct to update existing Emacs rules to comply with the specification
> but I do not think it matters to mention Emacs when deciding what should be
> the GDB standard.
Sigh. Straw man.
Whatever we end up with, emacs will do the right thing, given
"fill-column: XX" in the file, so again, I really don't personally
care what the width is. Yes, I agree that requiring different widths
for different things is silly.
>> As I said, I really don't care that much about the precise width.
>> It'd be nice to have it changed consistently across the tree
>> though.
>
> One should define first what is "the tree", currently it contains many
> directions which seems irrelevant for GDB decisions to me (tcl, texinfo,
> newlib, rda, ...).
Sure, the things outside src/gdb/ that are part of gdb as well:
src/, src/bfd/, src/include/, src/include/gdb/, etc.
> And even in that case GDB already contains Coding Style in gdbint.texinfo
> specific only to gdb/ so unifying the ChangeLog standard across the tree
> (whatever that means) is only that "nice to have", not a requirement.
Sure. I did say "it'd be nice", didn't I?
I'm all for consistency, so on my part, if this results in
better consistency, go for it. Please update
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog gdb/doc/ChangeLog too though.
--
Pedro Alves