GNU bug report logs - #23989
[PATCH] dfa: Reindent dfa.c

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 23989 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 23989 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Norihiro Tanaka <noritnk <at> kcn.ne.jp>
To: <bug-grep <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH] dfa: Reindent dfa.c
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:09:21 +0900

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Reindent this like:
indent with indent --no-tabs -l79 -Tsize_t -Tbool -Twint_t
-Tposition_set -Tmust dfa.c
and adjust it.

[0001-dfa-Reindent-dfa.c.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 23989-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
To: Norihiro Tanaka <noritnk <at> kcn.ne.jp>, 23989-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#23989: [PATCH] dfa: Reindent dfa.c
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:29:38 +0200

Thanks. I think the internal tabs are deliberate, so let's leave those 
alone. (Admittedly the code is not consistent in this area.) I installed 
the other white-space changes.

Message #13 received at 23989-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Norihiro Tanaka <noritnk <at> kcn.ne.jp>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: 23989-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#23989: [PATCH] dfa: Reindent dfa.c
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 21:42:07 +0900

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:29:38 +0200
Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> Thanks. I think the internal tabs are deliberate, so let's leave those alone. (Admittedly the code is not consistent in this area.) I installed the other white-space changes.

Thanks.  Although I also felt that tabs are deliberate, I included them
in the patch intentionally.

Message #16 received at 23989-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: sur-behoffski <sur_behoffski <at> grouse.com.au>
To: 23989-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Content-based source tracing, and tabs versus spaces
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 20:06:27 +0930

I've mentioned this previously, but will just add quickly:

Some projects I've been on (admittedly originating in the '90s,
much, much later than the early UNIX tools), have had a
only-allow-spaces-for-indentation policy.  The rationale behind
this was because content-based version control systems (such as
Git) would treat any change in preceding whitespace as a
substantial change to the file, and the spaces-only approach, the
lowest common denominator, was the only choice that could make
the file indentation unambiguous in the face of hashes such as
MD5, SHA1, SHA256 etc.  (Things like "diff -b" meant that some
earlier source control systems could ignore changes in
whitespace.)

While there are other minor benefits to a non-TAB approach, my
(not so humble) personal opinion is the elimination of hash
ambiguity is the strongest argument for a spaces-only indentation
policy in the long run.

cheers,

sur-behoffski [etc...]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.