Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 21:20:39 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/tail forward.c read.c reverse.c tail Message-ID: <200012041920.eB4JKbe38294@gratis.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.001204105855.jhb@FreeBSD.org> ; from John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> "Mon, 04 Dec 2000 10:58:55 PST." References: <XFMail.001204105855.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> They also ignore the register keyword, so this is a rather pointless change, > although it does add to repo bloat and in more active code could make diffs > harder to read. :-/ This particular code is very probably a lousy example, but when too many "minimalist" changes get made to a file, the file _sucks_ after some years. At some stage, garbage collection needs to be done. I recently tried to understand the twisty maze of garbage in sys/i386/... and was very frustated with the rotten (albeit functional) state of that code. Compare sys/i386/... with sys/alpha/... ( and the even more recent sys/ia64/... ) to see what I mean. I'm not promoting anything as destructive as a wholesale indent(1) of the code; that is silly. I _am_ saying that accepting code cleanups as inevitable is reasonable. Yes, we need to be conservative about them. But not conservative to the state of immobility. M -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012041920.eB4JKbe38294>