[PATCH v5 1/6] clang-format: indent preprocessor directives after hash

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



We do not have a rule around the indentation of preprocessor directives.
This was also discussed on the list [1], noting how there is often
inconsistency in the styling. While there was discussion, there was no
conclusion around what is the preferred style here. One style being
indenting after the hash:

    #if FOO
    #  if BAR
    #    include <foo>
    #  endif
    #endif

The other being before the hash:

    #if FOO
      #if BAR
        #include <foo>
      #endif
    #endif

Let's pick the former and add 'IndentPPDirectives: AfterHash' value to
our '.clang-format'. There is no clear reason to pick one over the
other, but it would definitely be nicer to be consistent.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/r/xmqqwmmm1bw6.fsf@gitster.g

Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 .clang-format | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/.clang-format b/.clang-format
index 3ed4fac753..5e128519bf 100644
--- a/.clang-format
+++ b/.clang-format
@@ -96,6 +96,12 @@ BreakStringLiterals: false
 # Switch statement body is always indented one level more than case labels.
 IndentCaseLabels: false
 
+# Indents directives before the hash.
+# #if FOO
+# #  include <foo>
+# #endif
+IndentPPDirectives: AfterHash
+
 # Don't indent a function definition or declaration if it is wrapped after the
 # type
 IndentWrappedFunctionNames: false
-- 
2.45.2





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux