Stephan Beyer wrote: > On 09/29/2017 08:40 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Going forward, is there an easy way to preview the effect of this kind >> of change (e.g., to run "make style" on the entire codebase so as to be >> able to compare the result with two different versions of >> .clang-format)? > > I just ran clang-format before and after the patch and pushed to github. > The resulting diff is quite big: > > https://github.com/sbeyer/git/commit/3d1186c4cf4dd7e40b97453af5fc1170f6868ccd Thanks. The first change I see there is -char *strbuf_realpath(struct strbuf *resolved, const char *path, int die_on_error) +char * +strbuf_realpath(struct strbuf *resolved, const char *path, int die_on_error) I understand why the line is broken, but the choice of line break is wrong. Seems like the penalty for putting return type on its own line quite high enough. My Reviewed-by still stands, though. It gets "make style" to signal long lines that should be broken, which is an improvement. > PS: There should be a comment at the beginning of the .clang-format file > that says what version it is tested with (on my machine it worked with > 5.0 but not with 4.0) and there should also probably a remark that the > clang-format-based style should only be understood as a hint or guidance > and that most of the Git codebase does not conform it. Sounds good to me. Care to send it as a patch? :) Thanks, Jonathan
