Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ylavic.dev@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.223.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <m0ussf$de2$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <m0ussf$de2$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 22:25:31 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAKQ1sVMtajsDDo1BMa-2znDf_mhSN9utfky754z7VzfeQdjbLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Style
From: Yann Ylavic <ylavic.dev@gmail.com>
To: httpd <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi Christophe,

personnaly I quite like style (reasonable) difference between coders
(but tabs!), and I usually preserve the existing style when modifying
others' code.

I don't find httpd codes style so heterogeneous, and almost always
easily readable.
Maybe we can just comment on gross style issues while reviewing the commits...

So I'm rather -0.1 for this.

Regards,
Yann.

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Christophe JAILLET
<christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> following a remark of Eric Covener about 'indent', I started to play with
> it.
> I have committed a few patches in trunk on modules that don't have any
> differences between 2.4 and trunk.
>     debugging/mod_firehose    (only in trunk)
>     debugging/mod_dumpio
>     debugging/mod_bucketeer
>     echo/mod_echo
>     aaa/mod_allowmethods
>
> My first goal was to see if many things "had" to be fixed.
>
> Well, depending on the files, these can lead to update a relatively large
> amount of lines.
>
>
> 1) This kind of patch should have no impact on generated code.
> I md5sum the .o files before and after modification. Some difference exist.
> I guess that it is due to debugging information embedded in the .o file.
>
> What is the best way to check that these changes have no side effects?
> Should disabling the debug in my makefile be enough?
>
>
> 2) As it involve sometimes a lot of changes, I was wondering if it worthed
> it.
> Even if binary comparison can be a good starting point, reviews required by
> the voting system could be very time consuming for others.
> Moreover, in case of #if, not all paths would be checked with binary
> comparison. This could be bug prone.
>
> On the other side, if housekeeping is never done, will never have the
> benefit of it...
>
>
> 3) These kind of changes can easily conflict with other patches. Backporting
> things would then become a real nightmare for everyone.
> So, I think that no such style issue should be fixed on files that differ
> between trunk and 2.4 (or only 1 line changes or after the last difference)
> However, the question remains in case of 2.2 backport.
>
>
> So, do you think that such "clean up" worth the effort or that things should
> be left as-is ?
> Thanks for feed back.
>
> CJ
>