On 05.09.2016 18:34, tmiket wrote:
On 2016-09-04 12:36, Martin Roth wrote:
Hey Nico,Thanks for writing that up and not just
letting this drop
resolution and action.
To anyone just coming in on the discussion, here's what we're talking
I am new to this discussion and to coreboot.
Welcome to coreboot, then :)
This appears to be a "hidden" page in that the TOC on top left doesn't
a link called Coding Style. Is this a new work in progress page?
I wouldn't call it "hidden". As with most wikis, there is just no com-
It appears more detailed than the corresponding Coding Style in the
Development Guidelines page.
Actually, that page links to Coding_Style in section 2.5. But maybe we
should link it on the Welcome page, too.
I'm asking because I start a new job that uses coreboot and I'm working
my way through the online documentation.
> I'd suggest just a couple of changes to your update:
> Let's define what a "short" comment is to avoid future arguments that
> lines is short:
>> /* This is the preferred style for
>> two or three line comments that
>> avoids excessive blank lines. */
> And I'm not certain of this paragraph, and I'd recommend removing or
> changing it a bit.
>> In case of doubt, the author of the code shall have the last word on
>> comment styles. He should know best which style makes his code most
> 1) I think that Stefan as the project leader should have the decision
> anything that is controversial enough to need a last word.
> 2) What if the author is female? :) Maybe use 'they' as the pronoun
> if this
> paragraph is left in. Not a big deal, but I'd like to be inclusive.
> 3) I think this might be just asking for arguments. I'm not talking
> about anyone
> specific, just thinking of discussions in the past.
> -- "As the author I LIKE ascii art in my comments and I get the final
> -- We're going to get lawyer arguments: "It says above that the c99
> is valid - why can't we just prefix the whole 16 line block with
> -- "I know it says not to say 'increment i', but as the author, I
> think it's
> 4) I think this would be the only "the author has the final say"
> policy - what
> happens when someone rewrites the comment in a following patch? Who
> is the author?
> Maybe we could change it from "has the last word" to something saying
>> If the author has reasonable arguments for breaking the recommended
>> style guide to improve readability, others should be respectful of
> I think this preserves the intent without some of the issues.
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> I think we kind of agreed that the wiki text about "Commenting"
>> change. So here is my proposal, feel free to edit, add something or
>> ack or complain about it.
>>> == Commenting ==
>>> Comments are good, but there is also a danger of over-commenting.
>>> try to explain HOW your code works in a comment: it's much better
>>> write the code so that the _working_ is obvious, and it's a waste
>>> time to explain badly written code.
>>> Generally, you want your comments to tell WHAT your code does, not
>>> Also, try to avoid complex comments inside a function body: if the
>>> function is so complex that you need to separately comment parts
>> of it,
>>> you should probably go back to chapter 6 for a while. You can
>>> small comments to note or warn about something particularly clever
>>> ugly), but try to avoid excess. Instead, put the comments at the
>>> of the function, telling people what it does, and possibly WHY it
>>> coreboot style for comments is the C89 "/* ... */" style. You may
>>> use C99-style "// ..." comments.
>>> The preferred style for concise multi-line comments that explain a
>>> single piece of code is:
>>> /* This is the preferred style for
>>> shorter multi-line comments that
>>> avoids excessive blank lines. */
>>> Note that there shouldn't be leading asterisks on new lines in the
>>> concise style.
>>> The preferred style for long multi-line comments is:
>>> * This is the preferred style for multi-line
>>> * comments in the coreboot source code.
>>> * Description: A column of asterisks on the left side,
>>> * with beginning and ending almost-blank lines.
>>> Some rules of thumb to decide which style to use:
>>> * If you are commenting a whole function (indentation level 0) or
>>> something high level (indentation level 1), use the long style.
>>> * If you want to explain a single piece of code and your comment
>>> doesn't span multiple paragraphs, use the concise style.
>>> * Otherwise you might want to ask yourself why what you're going
>>> explain doesn't deserve an own function.
>>> It's also important to comment data, whether they are basic types
>>> derived types. To this end, use just one data declaration per
>> line (no
>>> commas for multiple data declarations). This leaves you room for
>>> small comment on each item, explaining its use.
>>> In case of doubt, the author of the code shall have the last word
>>> comment styles. He should know best which style makes his code