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

Re: Xen Coding style and clang-format


On 19/10/2020 19:07, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, Artem Mygaiev wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
Sent: пятница, 16 октября 2020 г. 13:24
To: Anastasiia Lukianenko <Anastasiia_Lukianenko@xxxxxxxx>; jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; 
Cc: Artem Mygaiev <Artem_Mygaiev@xxxxxxxx>; vicooodin@xxxxxxxxx; 
xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; viktor.mitin.19@xxxxxxxxx; 
Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Xen Coding style and clang-format


On 16/10/2020 10:42, Anastasiia Lukianenko wrote:
Thanks for your advices, which helped me improve the checker. I
understand that there are still some disagreements about the
formatting, but as I said before, the checker cannot be very flexible
and take into account all the author's ideas.

I am not sure what you refer by "author's ideas" here. The checker
should follow a coding style (Xen or a modified version):
     - Anything not following the coding style should be considered as
     - Anything not written in the coding style should be left
untouched/uncommented by the checker.


I suggest using the
checker not as a mandatory check, but as an indication to the author of
possible formatting errors that he can correct or ignore.

I can understand that short term we would want to make it optional so
either the coding style or the checker can be tuned. But I don't think
this is an ideal situation to be in long term.

The goal of the checker is to automatically verify the coding style and
get it consistent across Xen. If we make it optional or it is
"unreliable", then we lose the two benefits and possibly increase the
contributor frustration as the checker would say A but we need B.

Therefore, we need to make sure the checker and the coding style match.
I don't have any opinions on the approach to achieve that.

Of the list of remaining issues from Anastasiia, looks like only items 5
and 6 are conform to official Xen coding style. As for remainning ones,
I would like to suggest disabling those that are controversial (items 1,
2, 4, 8, 9, 10). Maybe we want to have further discussion on refining
coding style, we can use these as starting point. If we are open to
extending style now, I would suggest to add rules that seem to be
meaningful (items 3, 7) and keep them in checker.

Good approach. Yes, I would like to keep 3, 7 in the checker.

I would also keep 8 and add a small note to the coding style to say that
comments should be aligned where possible.

+1 for this. Although, I don't mind the coding style used as long as we have a checker and the code is consistent :).


Julien Grall



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.