Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:39:40 +0100 From: Alex Dupre <ale@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r459751 - in head/lang: . solidity solidity/files Message-ID: <20672682-8a8d-affc-7bbe-022c076bd1d9@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20180123151811.GA68777@FreeBSD.org> References: <201801231358.w0NDwMa8074241@repo.freebsd.org> <20180123140938.GA73049@FreeBSD.org> <57ffd7bd-6a3f-b315-b582-17d9dccee5a8@FreeBSD.org> <20180123151811.GA68777@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >> Come on, then the comment for the scala port should be "Programming >> Language"? > > `lang/scala's COMMENT is also quite bad. It is not an excuse to add > more bad and excessively-cap'ed COMMENTs. It's not an excuse, I simply don't agree. The fact that the programming language has the same name of the port doesn't exclude its use in the COMMENT. You are saying that another Solidity compiler can have the comment "Yet another Solidity compiler", but the solidity port cannot have "Solidity" in its comment because it matches the port name, it doesn't make any sense. The rule has been created to avoid comments like "XYZ is another Solidity compiler", where XYZ is the port name. -- Alex Dupre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20672682-8a8d-affc-7bbe-022c076bd1d9>