[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150409161917.GA2378@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:19:17 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Coding Style
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 06:14:10PM +0200, magnum wrote:
> On 2015-04-09 17:58, Solar Designer wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 08:58:42PM +0800, Kai Zhao wrote:
> >> Even though
> >> Kernel style states that "Never break user-visible strings such as printk
> >> messages even it exceeds column 80" , the checkpatch.pl can't find this
> >> problem, since the situation maybe complex. I think it would be better to
> >> manually review these strings.
> >
> > FWIW, while I understand the rationale behind this rule, I dislike it.
>
> Is this about grepping for strings you saw on screen? I'm sure I hold
> the world record in doing that with JtR, and I really never saw this as
> a problem. Sure, I've had to re-phrase my grep at times but that's not a
> big deal.
Same here.
> If it is a problem, this is too:
>
> #define ALGORITHM_NAME "MD5 " MD5_ALGORITHM_NAME
>
> as is this:
>
> fprintf(stderr, "Waiting for %d child%s to terminate\n",
> waiting_for, waiting_for == 1 ? "" : "ren");
>
> Rewriting them so people can grep for the actual strings printed, would
> be plain silly.
Exactly.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
