Re: [PATCH 9/9] CodingStyle: flip the rule about curlies

[Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>]

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 06:56:56PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 09:43:10AM -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> > On 5/9/2025 11:18 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 11:34:30PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > >> Require set of curlies {} in all if/else branches and all loops
> > >> not matter how simple.
> > > 
> > > Sorry, but no, we are not going to change this long-term coding style
> > > rule for no real reason at this point in time.
> > 
> > Is the infamous Apple SSL bug (CVE-2014-1266) a good reason?

Indeed.

Thanks, curlies were inspired by this CVE but I forgot to mention it.

> One bug in 2014 will require us to touch 30+ million lines of code?

Nobody is proposing to reformat 30 mil lines at one commit
(as much as I'd like it).

Old code will stay old, new code will be formatted per new rules.

> Please be reasonable.

I'm very reasonable. Each patch details rationale why specific style is
better.

> And everyone, remember _why_ we have a coding style.  It's not so much
> the specifics of _what_ the coding style is,

What? When was the last time you read it? It is very much about specifics:
8 spaces, opening curly on the same line except at function scope,
80 columns, recent rule about to format function attributes.

It could have even more specific if there is pre-commit hook forcing
formatting like commercial companies do.

> one at all.  Don't argue the specifics of the coding style without a
> really really good reason why, with real details and proof.

What is "really really good"?

How do you know when it is good reason or not?

I think I have good reason: I programmed a little in another languages
where some of the rules don't apply. In particular C++/Rust don't have
a rule about declaring variables upfront. Nor does any popular programming
language designed in the last 35 years (?).

Such experience made me realize that linux-kernel CodingStyle in this
regard is pointless at best and counter-productive. It was so obvious.

> It took us a long time to increase the default line length, and that too
> is still argued about for very good and valid reasons.

It still 80 columns in CodingStyle.

> That was discussed in detail, not just thrown at us like this patch series was.

Oh come on. In Russia we say "not my first year of marriage".

One of the unwritten rules of linux-kernel is to NEVER post [RFC]
as it will be ignored, but to post a [PATCH] and Cc specific people
to force a discussion.

I don't want to look like a thief who sneaks in occasional declaration
in the middle of a function or set of curlies and get yelled by compilers
or maintainers (especially those armed with checkpatch.pl).

I'll codify this first in CodingStyle, then delete relevant checks from
checkpatch.pl (citing CodingStyle of course).