On 8/14/2017 6:02 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Add a '.clang-format' file which outlines the git project's coding
style. This can be used with clang-format to auto-format .c and .h
files to conform with git's style.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx>
Applying this patch and running
clang-format -i -style file *.c *.h builtin/*.c
produces a diff, that I'd mostly agree with.
This style guide is close to our current style.
I'm happy to see progress being made in helping reduce the time spent
manually reviewing and fixing style formatting errors. In an effort to
help, I installed this in Windows and tried it as well. The tools all
appear to be working fine and are supported on Windows.
For the most part, the formatting rules look pretty consistent with the
existing style. I ran the same test and looked at the diffs and saw a
couple of things that looked odd. For example, how it wrapped the
"static int" on the function header below was different. Not sure why
as it didn't wrap all the other function headers the same even later in
the file it didn't do that with "static void mute_routine"
diff --git a/apply.c b/apply.c
index f2d599141d..bb77242e3d 100644
--- a/apply.c
+++ b/apply.c
@@ -58,12 +59,11 @@ static int parse_whitespace_option(struct
apply_state *state, const char *option
return error(_("unrecognized whitespace option '%s'"), option);
}
-static int parse_ignorewhitespace_option(struct apply_state *state,
- const char *option)
+static int
+parse_ignorewhitespace_option(struct apply_state *state, const char
*option)
{
- if (!option || !strcmp(option, "no") ||
- !strcmp(option, "false") || !strcmp(option, "never") ||
- !strcmp(option, "none")) {
+ if (!option || !strcmp(option, "no") || !strcmp(option, "false") ||
+ !strcmp(option, "never") || !strcmp(option, "none")) {
state->ws_ignore_action = ignore_ws_none;
return 0;
}
Later in the file it wraps some of them again: (add_line_info,
prepare_image, find_name_common, etc). Again, it appears to be
inconsistent but there must be some rule that is causing this behavior.
Here is an example of how it wrapped bit fields differently. Again, it
didn't seem to be consistent with itself as just below this, it left
them on separate lines.
@@ -182,8 +185,7 @@ struct fragment {
* but some codepaths store an allocated buffer.
*/
const char *patch;
- unsigned free_patch:1,
- rejected:1;
+ unsigned free_patch : 1, rejected : 1;
int size;
int linenr;
struct fragment *next;
Big thanks to those working on this!
As noted in patch 2/2 we'd now need an easy way to
expose this for use in various situations, such as
* contributor wanting to format their patch
* reformatting code for readability
Thanks,
Stefan
