From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753882Ab2BDBhc (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2012 20:37:32 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:52716 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750804Ab2BDBhb (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2012 20:37:31 -0500 Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:37:50 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Joe Perches , Andy Whitcroft , Ingo Molnar , Cyrill Gorcunov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov , Serge Hallyn , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Kees Cook , Tejun Heo , Andrew Vagin , "Eric W. Biederman" , Alexey Dobriyan , Andi Kleen , KOSAKI Motohiro , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Glauber Costa , Matt Helsley , Pekka Enberg , Eric Dumazet , Vasiliy Kulikov , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on code with 6+ tab indentation Message-Id: <20120203173750.1ea9e7f0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20120130140905.441199885@openvz.org> <20120130141852.309402052@openvz.org> <20120203074656.GC30543@elte.hu> <20120203083530.GD1968@moon> <20120203090929.GA23996@elte.hu> <20120203012241.bcd3d0c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120203095227.GA13162@elte.hu> <20120203100743.GA3334@elte.hu> <1328311239.21255.24.camel@joe2Laptop> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:27:36 -0800 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > Overly indented code should be refactored. > > > > Suggest refactoring excessive indentation of > > of if/else/for/do/while/switch statements. > > I hate this patch. > > Why? Because mindless checks like this would just lead to people > making things worse and intermixing spaces there instead. > > That's the same reason the 80-character check has been a total > disaster. People shut it up by splitting long strings etc, and we've > had to change that 80-character test many times just to avoid the > crazy workarounds. > > Don't warn about things that will just result in people working around > the warnings with worse code! > Sampling bias ;) You notice the 80-col fixups which resulted in poor-looking code and not the fixups which resulted in decent-looking code.