Message ID | 1353490921.6559.40.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong.il.broadcom.com |
---|---|
State | Not Applicable, archived |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 11:42 +0200, Eilon Greenstein wrote: > On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 15:41 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 23:19 +0000, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 01:58:48PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > > +# check for multiple blank lines, warn only on the second one in a block > > > > + if ($rawline =~ /^.\s*$/ && > > > > + $prevrawline =~ /^.\s*$/ && > > > > + $linenr != $last_blank_linenr + 1) { > > > > + CHK("DOUBLE_EMPTY_LINE", > > > > + "One blank line separating blocks is generally sufficient\n" . $herecurr); > > > > + $last_blank_linenr = $linenr; > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > # check for line continuations in quoted strings with odd counts of " > > > > if ($rawline =~ /\\$/ && $rawline =~ tr/"/"/ % 2) { > > > > WARN("LINE_CONTINUATIONS", > > > > > > Pretty sure that will fail with combination which have removed lines. > > > > Not as far as I can tell. > > Deleted lines followed by inserted lines seem > > to work OK. > > > > This check is located after the test that ensures > > the current $line/$rawline is an insertion. > > > > But you do not look at the next line, so you will miss something like > that: > > diff --git a/test.c b/test.c > index e3c46d4..e1c6ffc 100644 > --- a/test.c > +++ b/test.c > @@ -15,7 +15,8 @@ > * something > * something > * something > - * next line was already empty */ > + * next line was already empty, but I'm adding another one now*/ > + Hi Eilon. Thanks for the test case. That's true, but I'm OK with missing a few cases in the search for simplicity as long as there aren't significant false positives. For instance the next test # check for line continuations in quoted strings with odd counts of " if ($rawline =~ /\\$/ && $rawline =~ tr/"/"/ % 2) { WARN("LINE_CONTINUATIONS", That fails if the rawline is: "\"" \ Does it matter much? Probably not. I suppose that test could be improved by using $line. checkpatch isn't a perfect tool. Given how it's constructed, I doubt it ever could be. No doubt you and Andy will find a better solution. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 07:01 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > checkpatch isn't a perfect tool. Given how it's constructed, > I doubt it ever could be. Joe - I completely agree, this is why I'm not to concern about the potential miss in the version I suggested. Thanks, Eilon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/test.c b/test.c index e3c46d4..e1c6ffc 100644 --- a/test.c +++ b/test.c @@ -15,7 +15,8 @@ * something * something * something - * next line was already empty */ + * next line was already empty, but I'm adding another one now*/ + /* something else * something else