From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 319131F54E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:37:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ZRa8ZnOj"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232741AbiHJShq (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:37:46 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44330 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233695AbiHJShj (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:37:39 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C86F6BD6D for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF99D1B5071; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:37:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=SQHtkYtzl0lYIetZn+QTR2N501Ny7ynXYJ4Bf+ nNbhY=; b=ZRa8ZnOj1tNO2ijQ+pp1a0VZVXC9MfPTQtbo5T/PlFh9Lk82GmfvCY 97I3YjVaQXe5XDjUIi96ZDp1JdbrdfAZ2hKegIB4TywH+TPYTgad5LkwI+dZ5S3O BPUBkn46ThhzoOTkHyqPvYjcQjlSQIN5pv02Aw4NBM5tr1udh8Q94= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B740C1B5070; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:37:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.145.39.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 661581B506D; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:37:34 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Matheus Tavares , git@vger.kernel.org, avarab@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] t0021: implementation the rot13-filter.pl script in C References: <86e6baba460f4d0fce353d1fb6a0e18b57ecadaa.1659291025.git.matheus.bernardino@usp.br> <439p713r-32o4-5187-n8nn-r81n3007s4pp@tzk.qr> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:37:33 -0700 In-Reply-To: <439p713r-32o4-5187-n8nn-r81n3007s4pp@tzk.qr> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 9 Aug 2022 12:00:02 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 80185AB6-18DB-11ED-BFA3-CBA7845BAAA9-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > I would like to encourage you to think of ways how this project could > avoid the cost (mental space, reviewer time, back and forth between > contributor and reviewer) of such trivial code formatting issues. I do not need your encouragement. I am sure the submitter could have run clang-format or checkpatch.pl or whatever and noticed the issue. Small style diversions in submitted patches are distracting enough to prevent me from concentrating on and noticing problems in the more important aspects like correctness and leakiness. That is why people get formatting issues pointed out and CodingGuidelines talks about styles. Checkpatch is OK, but IIRC, you cannot ask to check "only the code I changed in this patch" to clang-format, which may be the show stopper. Otherwise, I would quite welcome an automated "pre-flight" automation, like "make" target, that submitters can use and GGG can help them use. Thanks.