Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI: platform-profile: Add platform profile support

[Mark Pearson <markpearson@lenovo.com>]

Thanks Hans

On 16/11/2020 09:33, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 11/16/20 12:04 AM, Mark Pearson wrote:
> 
> <snip>
>>> I believe there's no reason to remove the comma from there, and in fact,
>>> having a comma after the last entry in an array, enum, etc. seems to be
>>> the preferred.
>> OK.
>> Have to be honest - I struggle to know when comma's are needed on the last entry and when they aren't (I've had similar corrections in other cases both ways :)). I do seem to have a knack of getting it consistently wrong....
> 
> Do the rule of thumb here is, if the last element is a terminating element,
> e.g. NULL or {} or foo_number_of_foo_types in an enum foo declaration then
> there should not be a comma after the last element. The reason for is is
> that in case case new entries will be added one line above the last element.
> 
> If there is no terminating element (e.g. because ARRAY_SIZE is always used
> on the array). Then the last element should end with a comma. The reason for
> this is so that the unified diff of a patch adding a new element does not
> have -++ lines, as would be necessary when the comma is missing (-+ to add
> the comma, plus one more + for the new element).
> 
> I hope this helps explain.
It does - makes complete sense.
> 
> I expect you will send out a v4 of the entire set addressing all current
> remarks?

Absolutely. Hopefully will get that out soon but I'm going to take a bit 
longer on it as I was pretty disappointed with myself for some of the 
things that slipped into the last set. I'll aim to get a cleaner set out 
for v4.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Hans
> 
Thanks
Mark