> On 15 Feb 2018, at 11:59, Frediano Ziglio <fziglio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> >>> On 15 Feb 2018, at 10:07, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:29:25PM +0100, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 14 Feb 2018, at 17:34, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:45:56AM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Shouldn't this go with a Makefile rule? A few lines in the log what >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> is about, what is the goal for having this file, ... would not hurt. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Christophe >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think this file is supposed to just help developers so should not >>>>>> be in the Makefile. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, after reading various threads, it's apparently meant to be used >>>>> together with emacs for formatting of small code blocks, it's not usable >>>>> on the whole codebase. So a 'make clang-format' rule apparently would >>>>> not make sense. >>>>> >>>>>> I think you mean that the intention should be written in the commit >>>>>> message. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, knowing how it's meant to be used, why we want it in the codebase. >>>> >>>> Why would we NOT want it in the codebase? >>> >>> I'm not saying I'm against what this patch is adding. I'm saying >>> I'm against a commit adding something without much of a rationale in its >>> commit log. >> >> Fair point. Added that. >> >> To clarify, right now, I don’t think we can refactor whole files yet, the >> code is not ready for it. See >> https://gitlab.com/c3d/spice-server/commit/f6297e63f5e785e5fdf7176fd9381d0f465f6c11 >> for a review of the server changes, if you are curious. >> > > I think the main reason is that you are attempting to change the > current style entirely. No, really not. > For instance we have a section that explicitly state we don't > want column alignment. Yes, ooops. That was not in the branch when I originally pushed it for review, and then I experimented with that setting and did a push -f. > Or see the section about section declaration. ? > >> Some of the issues include: >> >> - Our headers are not yet self-contained, so you get: >> In file included from agent-msg-filter.c:25: >> In file included from ./red-common.h:37: >> In file included from ./spice.h:27: >> ./spice-migration.h:47:31: error: unknown type name ‘SpiceServer' >> > > I test quite often and as far as I know they are self contained. I just proved they are not :-) > In this case spice-migration.h should be included from spice.h > and SpiceServer is defined in spice-server.h included from spice.h > before spice-migration.h. That is the very definition of “not self contained" > >> - Some comments get munged, notably comments at end of line: >> >> - Minor things, like a macro where (id) & CONSTANT interpreted as a cast (id) >> with address taken and reformatted accordingly >> >> Christophe > > If your intention with this file is changing the entire style > I would personally avoid it. No. I did this experiment to get a feel of how close I was to the original style (assuming there really is one, which is not obvious from reading the code). > > The subject is "Add .clang-format with defaults matching what's specified > in the style guide", from the branch you pointed out looks like is false. Not, it looks like it is not yet true ;-) For instance, I noticed by doing this experiment that “Linux” is wrong, we want “Mozilla”. Also, I think we would need BinPackParameters: false. I experimented with the alignment to try to fix issues I was observing with the alignment of parameters, but as you point out, it also aligns decls. I personally like that, but that’s not what the style guide says. > > Frediano _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel