[asterisk-dev] Line length restrictions in code changes

[Kevin Harwell]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Matthew Jordan <mjordan at digium.com> wrote:

> <snip>
>
> Personally, I find this:
>
> if (a_good_variable_name->another_good_name &&
> do_something_to_it(a_good_variable_name->another_good_name)) {
>     // Do things
> }
>

I prefer this to the alternative as well.


> if (a_good_variable_name->another_good_name
>     && do_something_to_it(a_good_variable_name->another_good_name)) {
>     // Do things
> }
>
> <snip>
>
> Questions than:
> (1) Should there even be a line length rule?
>

I lean toward yes just to keep things sane (e.g. keeping someone extending
a function definition to infinity and beyond). Also sometimes I split my
editor's screen vertically and have multiple code views up. The vertical
split reduces my column length and I either have to start scrolling or (in
my current setup) the line gets wrapped. Both hurt readability for me.

(2) If there is a line length, what is a reasonable length given some
of our function names? (Looking at things like
ast_sip_get_mwi_disable_initial_unsolicited)

I personally think the current length of 90 is reasonable. I'll add though
that going a bit above this (say up to 100) in some cases should not
prevent code submission. For instance if a variable name is going to extend
an 'if' statement 4 more characters there is no reason to break that up.

(3) Should we simply advocate for readability, with examples of what
is readable and what is not?

Readability should be first and foremost, and some examples would probably
help with that.

-- 

Kevin Harwell
Digium, Inc. | Software Developer
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20170316/680e006a/attachment.html>