"brian m. carlson" <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 2022-07-11 at 11:37:26, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> Formatting bitfield as "unsigned foo:1" is the usual style in this >> project, not "unsigned foo : 1", which clang-format will use by >> default. >> >> Before & after this change running "make style-all-diff-apply" will >> yield: >> >> 582 files changed, 32029 insertions(+), 29794 deletions(-) >> 579 files changed, 32065 insertions(+), 29818 deletions(-) >> >> However this highlights a major limitation in this approach, because >> clang-format v12 or newer is required for this rule, but that version >> was only released in April 2021. > > This isn't supported on Debian stable, which has clang 11. I think we > should expect that to be a viable development target here, and I know > it's what some Git developers actually use. > > I think for now we should drop this patch, and we can reconsider it in > the future. Earlier, somebody said "things that are not explicitly spelled out in the guidelines, pick the more prevailing style", but I wonder which one between "unsigned foo:1" and "unsigned foo : 1" is more common in the current code. Also, I am a bit curious why nobody has brought up the checkpatch script we can borrow from the Linux kernel project. I used to check incoming patches before applying them and it was fairly effective in catching malformed code.
