[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: Clang-format configuration discussion - pt 2
On 23.11.2023 15:47, Luca Fancellu wrote: > Hi all, > > Let’s continue the discussion about clang-format configuration, this is part > 2, previous discussions are: > > - https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2023-11/msg00498.html > > You can find the serie introducing clang-format here: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/xen-devel/cover/20231031132304.2573924-1-luca.fancellu@xxxxxxx/ > and there is also a patch linked to my gitlab account where you can find the > output for the hypervisor code. > > For a full list of configurables and to find the possible values for them, > please refer to this page: > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangFormatStyleOptions.html > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Our coding style doesn’t mention anything about alignment, shall we add a new > section? > I can send patches when we reach agreement on each of these rules. > > > QualifierAlignment: Custom > QualifierOrder: ['static', 'inline', 'const', 'volatile', 'type'] > > --- > For “QualifierAlignment” I chose Custom in order to apply in “QualifierOrder” > an order for the > qualifiers that match the current codebase, we could specify also “Leave” in > order to keep > them as they are. Where do attributes go in this sequence? > Depending on how the discussion goes on this one, it could be an entry in our > coding style > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > AlignAfterOpenBracket: Align > > --- > This one is to align function parameters that overflows the line length, I > chose to align them > to the open bracket to match the current codebase (hopefully) > > e.g.: > someLongFunction(argument1, > argument2); The above matches neither of the two generally permitted styles: someLongFunction(argument1, argument2); someLongFunction( argument1, argument2); Then again from its name I would infer this isn't just about function arguments? > This one can be a candidate for an entry in our coding style > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > AlignArrayOfStructures: Left > > --- > “When using initialization for an array of structs aligns the fields into > columns." > It’s important to say that even if we specify “None”, it is going to format > the data structure anyway, > I choose left, but clearly I’m open to suggestions. You don't say in which way it re-formats such constructs. > I don’t know how to phrase this one in our coding style > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > AlignConsecutiveAssignments: None > > --- > This one is disabled because of feedbacks from Stefano and Alejandro about > some weird behaviour on our > codebase. > > This one could be phased along this line: “Consecutive assignments don't need > to be aligned.”, the issue is > that in this way it seems that it’s optional, but clang-format is going to > remove the alignment anyway for > assignment that are consecutive and aligned. Like below if there's no way to say "leave alone", then I don't consider this usable. Imo we want to permit people to align when they think it helps, but we don't want to demand them doing so. Jan > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > AlignConsecutiveBitFields: None > > --- > Same thing as AlignConsecutiveAssignments, but for bitfields. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > AlignConsecutiveDeclarations: None > > --- > This aligns declarations names, same considerations as > AlignConsecutiveAssignments. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Ok this is it for now, let me know your thoughts about them, ideally if I > don’t get any reply in two weeks (7th of December), > I will consider that we have an agreement on these configuration. > > Cheers, > Luca
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |