On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 10:24 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:43 AM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Now I come to find that CodingStyle has settled on clang-format (in > > the last 15 months) as the new standard which is a much better answer > > to me than a manually specified style open to interpretation. I'll > > take a look at getting libnvdimm converted over. > > Note that clang-format cannot do everything as we want within the > kernel just yet, but it is a close enough approximation -- it is near > the point where we could simply agree to use it and stop worrying > about styling issues. However, that would mean everyone needs to have > a recent clang-format available, which I think is the biggest obstacle > at the moment. I don't think that's close to true yet for clang-format. For instance: clang-format does not do anything with missing braces, or coalescing multi-part strings, or any number of other nominal coding style defects like all the for_each macros, aligning or not aligning columnar contents appropriately, etc... clang-format as yet has no taste. I believe it'll take a lot of work to improve it to a point where its formatting is acceptable and appropriate. An AI rather than a table based system like clang-format is more likely to be a real solution, but training that AI isn't a thing that I want to do.
