Re: [PATCH] Add pyramid style rule to CONTRIBUTING.md

[Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2025 11:05:09 +0800
Yumei Huang <yuhuang@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 10:28 AM Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Oct 2025 11:40:10 +1100
> > David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> >  
> > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 12:30:54PM +0800, Yumei Huang wrote:  
> > > > Also fix the copyright line.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yumei Huang <yuhuang@redhat.com>  
> > >
> > > Stefano, do we actually encourage that style for any "list of similar
> > > items"?  Or just for local variable declarations?  
> >
> > Just for local variable declarations, thanks for noticing.
> >
> > I was rather focusing on the fact (https://lwn.net/Articles/758552/)
> > that it's actually called "Reverse Christmas tree", not pyramid style.
> >
> > I can't find a convenient reference right now, maybe it's hidden
> > somewhere in https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/?q=reverse+christmas+tree,
> > ...or maybe it's actually "documented" in checkpatch.pl?  
> 
> I found it in Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst as below:
> 
> "
> Using reverse fir tree, a.k.a. reverse Christmas tree or reverse XMAS tree, for
> variable declarations isn't strictly required, though it is still preferred.
> "
> 
> I will update the name and make it only for local variable declarations.

Ah, thanks.

> Do I need to update the reference link as well? The name would be
> different from the current pyramids link
> (https://hisham.hm/2018/06/16/when-listing-repeated-things-make-pyramids/).
> Not sure if it would be a little bit confusing if not.

The "pyramid" link explains the reason why, it just uses a different
name.

Maybe we should mention both: the kernel link calls it that way, and the
pyramid link explains the rationale why it's used / preferred.

-- 
Stefano