This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PING^2][PATCH] Reformat malloc to gnu style.
- From: OndÅej BÃlka <neleai at seznam dot cz>
- To: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:35:31 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PING^2][PATCH] Reformat malloc to gnu style.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131230152001 dot GA5214 at domone> <52C2BF2A dot 9010009 at archlinux dot org> <20140101132020 dot GA12317 at domone> <52C4A758 dot 9070802 at archlinux dot org> <20140102034542 dot GG5374 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <52C50A54 dot 5060906 at archlinux dot org> <20140102090824 dot GA18222 at domone> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1401021616070 dot 28168 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20140102185509 dot GA24404 at domone> <20140109112228 dot GE31502 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com>
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 04:52:28PM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:55:09PM +0100, OndÅej BÃlka wrote:
> > That is missing a point, a formatting now was wastly different than gnu
> > one so goal was not get perfect on first try but to converge to
> > solution.
> >
> > In formatting patches there are three factors in play:
> >
> > 1) Amount of code formatted correctly.
> > 2) Amount of code left intact.
> > 3) Amount of code formatted incorrectly.
> >
> > Now factors 2 and 3 sum to amount of code that needs futher formatting.
> > If a formatter gets 95% of code right then you need to fix only 5% of
> > code which means that patches that fix these are twenty times smaller
> > than in first case.
> >
> > For our purposes it is mostly irrelevant if flaw was caused by formatter
> > or left over unless formatting causes loss of informattion. Where a style
> > allows only one possibility you cannot encode any information so that is
> > not a factor.
>
> Ondrej, did you get a chance to work on further fixes to formatting in
> malloc? I noticed during a rawhide rebase that a number of macros
> remain incorrectly formatted. It would be nice to have a consistently
> formatted malloc in 2.19.
>
Ok, I will send these probably tommorow.