From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19441 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2002 00:58:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 19434 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 00:58:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 00:58:29 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15226; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 17:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3D813833.9128F708@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 17:58:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: usage of tab in the indentation... References: <20020912190625.GB1105@gnat.com> <3D80E9D5.5AACB552@redhat.com> <20020912194531.GC1105@gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00236.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker wrote: > > > For my part, I just use emacs' default formatting, which > > pretty much relieves me of worrying about formatting, since > > it almost always conforms to the coding standard. And emacs > > uses tabs. It would be a nuisance for me to have to change. > > That's fair enough. I know it would cause some of us some problems > to switch to spaces, so wasn't really hoping for a change in policy, > but I'm still curious as to why we used tabs and not spaces. What are > the benefits? There's no rule that you have to use tabs either. Feel free to use spaces. > In the meantime, I take it people will not yell if the indentation in a > patch looks a bit bizarre :-)... We're used to it. ;-)