From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FBB2385C40F for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 23:09:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9FBB2385C40F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 16FN8XJQ022041; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:08:33 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 16FN8WEC022040; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:08:32 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:08:32 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: "Kewen.Lin" Cc: Richard Biener , GCC Patches , Bill Schmidt , richard.sandiford@arm.com Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] vect: Recog mul_highpart pattern Message-ID: <20210715230832.GK1583@gate.crashing.org> References: <0b72fa77-a281-35e6-34e3-17cf26f18bc1@linux.ibm.com> <20210714193246.GB1583@gate.crashing.org> <08efc2b2-dd61-1c15-df14-ebfcede2c664@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <08efc2b2-dd61-1c15-df14-ebfcede2c664@linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, TXREP, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR, T_SPF_PERMERROR autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 23:09:39 -0000 On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 09:40:52AM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: > on 2021/7/15 上午3:32, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > The normal rule is you cannot go over 80. It is perfectly fine to have > > shorter lines, certainly if that is nice for some other reason, so > > automatically (by some tool) changing this is Just Wrong. > > OK, could this be applied to changelog entry too? I guess yes? Yes, lines of length 80 are fine in changelogs. But try to not make short lines (that do no end an entry). A changelog that looks different from other changelogs is harder to read. Normally you have a whole bunch of totally boring entries ("New." or "Likewise." for example), and the few that are longer naturally stand out then, making it easier to scan the changelogs (which is what they are used for most of the time: search for something, and press "n" a lot). Also try to write less trivial things somewhat briefly in changelogs: changelogs just say *what* changed, not *why*, and it is okay to leave out details (this is a tradeoff of course). Segher