This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: an i18n sample
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>
- Cc: Baurjan Ismagulov <ibr at ata dot cs dot hun dot edu dot tr>,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:34:59 -0500
- Subject: Re: an i18n sample
- References: <20041024104805.GA2369@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <20041127205606.GF12080@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <01c4d4ce$Blat.v2.2.2$adeda280@zahav.net.il> <20041204194102.GB8003@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <20041204221947.GA3433@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <41BC7887.3050701@gnu.org>
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 11:57:43AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Baurjan Ismagulov wrote:
> >On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 08:41:02PM +0100, Baurjan Ismagulov wrote:
> >
> >>On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 12:14:59AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >>
> >>>Very good, thanks.
> >>
> >>Would you like to apply this?
> >
> >
> >Corrected the concatenation style.
>
> Baurjan, I really appologise here, but people should have known better
> than to request that you also make cosmetic changes such as switching
> from this:
Andrew, thank you so much for _apologizing profusely_ for me, and then
_approving_ and _committing_ a patch containing style changes that I
_objected_ to. Do you begin to see why I dislike working with you?
Do you at least acknowledge that you are being rude to me?
Baurjan did not preserve the existing style of concatenation; he
changed it to be uniform, to the one I object to (for the reasons I
gave). If you disagree with my reasons, then let's discuss that
instead of you executively overriding them. Neither the GNU nor GDB
coding style expresses a preference here. Baurjan and I both prefer
the concatenation style for aesthetic reasons and no one else chose to
express an opinion.
> The former style is used for for a clear and simple reason - it greatly
> simplifies the challenge of ensuring that the lines are <80 characters.
It also makes the source code much harder to skim through, because it
masks the indentation of the containing statement. And it makes diff
-p less useful.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz