[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] clang formatting discussion

From: Schanzenbach, Martin
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] clang formatting discussion
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 11:00:44 +0200

> On 18. Apr 2019, at 10:50, address@hidden wrote:
> Schanzenbach, Martin transcribed 4.5K bytes:
>>> On 17. Apr 2019, at 21:08, Christian Grothoff <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Signed PGP part
>>> From private discussion with Martin where I pointed out a few style
>>> issues I didn't like and Martin either created fixes or determined that
>>> what I wanted was not (yet) possible...
>>> (forwarding with permission)...
>>> On 4/17/19 3:58 PM, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
>>>> The thing is clang-format is built with the most common styles in
>>>> mind (including GNU). It does not cover every little corner case and
>>>> does not want to in order to keep it simple (see
>>> Yes, I did read that in the manual as well. Still, in the "worst case"
>>> we could consider patching it ourselves, but it would have to be a
>>> reasonably painful issue to justify that.
>>>> So either we move towards a tool-based solution (idk any other good
>>>> besides clang-format) and sacrifice such little issues like odd
>>>> formatting in the case of yoda expressions or just leave it as is.
>>> Well, the list of sacrifices (= styles generated by the tool that I
>>> personally don't like) is still a bit long. Regardless, I should start
>>> by saying that I appreciate your efforts at making it shorter, and I am
>>> still optimistic that this can be fixed. In the past we tried to get
>>> there with GNU indent (even patching it!), but ultimately it didn't
>>> quite work out. My feeling is that GNU indent didn't work in part
>>> because it ultimately required installing indent with our patches, and
>>> also in part because it didn't integrate with editors nicely.
>>> On that last point:
>>> There is still a few things we need to figure out (others on
>>> gnunet-developers might weigh in here). First of all, how compatible is
>>> this actually going to be with editing in Emacs and other editors?
>> I thought I said that in the beginning? Most editors have plugins:
>> emacs: 
>> (n)vim:
>> vscode: native
>> sublime:
> We can include an ASL2.0 (Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception) file
> in contrib right? As far as I remember asl2.0 is compatible to
> newer gpl.
> There's a diff reformater for clang-format.

Not sure I follow. The clang-format config has an implicit license?

>>> Sure, running an external tool afterwards is always possible, but does
>>> this integrate with Emacs to the point that the formatting is
>>> applied/conveniently apply-able during editing? (Say what I do right
>>> now: press Tab and have the indentation match what clang will do? Or can
>>> we adjust the existing Emacs style (and other editors!) to match 100%
>>> what clang formatter generates?)
>>> Naturally, some of the style issues that remain (like the impossibility
>>> to force a break after function arguments even if the line is short even
>>> without one) may feed into this.
>> _______________________________________________
>> GNUnet-developers mailing list
>> address@hidden

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]