On 10/15/2013 07:19 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 09:42:05AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> Finally if everybody agree they want to make this huge change, *then* I
> absolutely want to see each change also change debug numbers from
> numbers to the new macros. It makes no sense whatsoever to change the
> DEBUG form and leave in old debug numbers that we have been
> painstakingly changing little by little in the last few years.
>
> The current patch does not convert numbers to debug macros. Moreover it
> will not be really simple to do that in a way that will not screw up
> indentation / 80 columns rule, but it is up to the proponent of the huge
> patch to do that correctly :-) I am sure with enough dedication a script
> to do the correction properly can probably be made.
If Nikolai would agree to use something like Coccinelle (and perhaps, as
Sumit said, compare the results), then I think we could be more certain
that the patch doesn't break anything.
Moreover, we have support for detecting formatting errors (-Wformat) now
and all the existing warnings have been fixed.
I've just tried using Coccinelle to update debug levels and it works
beautifully.
I think I'll try using Coccinelle to both make DEBUG macro invocations
variadic and make them use the new debug levels and then apply a bit of Perl
to restore string literals to multiple lines. This will probably be more
reliable.
I'll send new patches, if there are no objections.
Sincerely,
Nick