[PATCH] Fix the build

Michael Adam obnox at samba.org
Fri Sep 2 08:29:05 UTC 2016


On 2016-09-02 at 09:21 +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:34:49 +0200
> Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Review appreciated!
> > 
> > Looking at commit 1c636532874da from a few weeks ago I begin to
> > question the value of our README.Coding file. I've asked a few times
> > to fix patches to follow the 80-column rule, I even provided patches
> > to assist.
> > 
> > There's a reason why we have this rule: It's not that we are all
> > sitting at 3270 or vt100 terminals. We want to avoid arbitrarily
> > deeply nested control structures. It might be more work, but
> > well-named factored out subfunctions foster unterstanding of complex
> > code. Looking at dsdb_garbage_collect_tombstones(), we have four
> > (!!)  levels of nested for-loops. One line I've just come across
> > almost touches twice the 80-columns with its length of 157 chars.
> > 
> > So, shall we drop the README.Coding section on 80 chars, as it is not
> > generally seen as worthwhile following?
> > 
> > Volker
> 
> Hi Volker, No, but you could fix the link to PEP8, it now seems to be at:
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/
> 
> Until you raised this, I didn't know about README.Coding, nobody told
> me, perhaps this is one reason why the 80 columns rule gets broken.

Perhaps...

https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Contribute#How_to_Provide_C_Patches_for_Samba


We should advertise that page more aggressively.

Michael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20160902/7f273a00/signature.sig>


More information about the samba-technical mailing list