Re: [PATCH v7 10/10] convert: add filter.<driver>.process option

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 15, 2016, 20:24 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqpoo4nc7d.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <928655D2-312B-4805-99DB-E73448232B9A@gmail.com>

Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

>> On 13 Sep 2016, at 17:22, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>> larsxschneider@gmail.com writes:
>> 
>>> diff --git a/contrib/long-running-filter/example.pl b/contrib/long-running-filter/example.pl
>>> ...
>>> +packet_write( "clean=true\n" );
>>> +packet_write( "smudge=true\n" );
>>
>> These extra SP around the contents inside () pair look unfamiliar
>> and somewhat strange to me, but as long as they are consistently
>> done (and I think you are mostly being consistent), it is OK.
>
> Ups. I forgot to run PerlTidy here. I run PerlTidy with the flag 
> "-pbp" (= Perl Best Practices). This seems to add no extra SP for
> functions with one parameter (e.g. `foo("bar")`) and extra SP
> for functions with multiple parameter (e.g. `foo( "bar", 1 )`).
> Is this still OK?

Your choice. I already said I do not care too much either way as long as you are consistent.

If you prefer PerlTidy's PBP output over what you wrote, and if you are resending the patch anyway, then why not? ;-)

> Does anyone have a "Git PerlTidy configuration"?

Not me.

Thanks.