80 column format

[Vladimir D. <vo...@mi...>]

I have been going through R300 drm source trying to implement all the 
suggestions that people offerred.

I am having some hard time with 80 column rule. Now, in general, I agree 
with it and it makes sense. However take a look at the following piece of 
code:

/******** snip ***** line 264 r300_cmdbuf.c ********/
 	for(i=0;i<sz;i++){
 		values[i]=((int __user*)cmdbuf->buf)[i];
 		switch(r300_reg_flags[(reg>>2)+i]){
 			case MARK_SAFE:
 				break;
 			case MARK_CHECK_OFFSET:
 				if(r300_check_offset(dev_priv, (u32)values[i])){
 					DRM_ERROR("Offset failed range check (reg=%04x sz=%d)\n", reg, sz);
 					return DRM_ERR(EINVAL);
 					}
 				break;
/******** snip ************************************/

To me it looks perfectly fine - we have a for cycle, a switch statement 
inside and an error check in one of switch statement clauses. I don't see 
how separating these out into other functions is going to improve 
readability.

Problem is that there is no sane way I can fit the error message in 80 
columns without being cryptic.

Any ideas ?

                        thank you !

                               Vladimir Dergachev