On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:41 AM Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 10/09/2020 17:32, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:24 AM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org > > <mailto:ged...@rtems.org>> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 12:06 AM Sebastian Huber > > <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I think we waste too much time to address coding style issues on > > newly > > > contributed code, for example GSoC. I don't know a source code > > > formatting tool which supports the RTEMS coding style and I > > think it is > > > not worth the time to write and maintain such a tool > > specifically for > > > RTEMS. Why don't we simply allow an alternative coding style > > which has a > > > good code formatter for new source files? I don't propose to > > reformat > > > the existing files. > > > > > > I would simply pick up one of the standard styles supported by > > > clang-format and declare it as an acceptable coding style for RTEMS. > > > > > > I am not willing to blanket accept another project's coding style. > > > > I am willing to accept a configuration for a tool that is close to our > > style and > > make compromises on specific points. > > We had a student to figure this out for clang-format some time ago: > > https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2019-February/024912.html > > We could also have a look at uncrustify: > > https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify > > It seems to be still actively maintained on Github. > > > > > I also think when doing this we should consider things that we do that > > we have since learned safety standards don't like such as single statement > > if's without braces. I think we should have braces now. > I think uncrustify had options to do this. I am not sure if clang-format > can do this. > > > > This is best viewed as an opportunity to improve but comes with changes > > since I don't think any of us wants to add a few more configuration > > options > > to any formatter. Although if we get close, I can see adding those as open > > projects if someone is interested. > Good, I think we should have a look at uncrustify. The RTEMS coding > style is too exotic for clang-format.
Let's start with uncrustify. The github looks solid with cross-platform compatibility claims (*nix, Windows, OSX). I know that there was an RTEMS style script generated by Sebastian some time ago. We had it on the wiki forever, but now it is a broken link in the docs https://devel.rtems.org/attachment/wiki/Developer/Coding/Conventions/rtems.uncrustify from https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/coding-conventions.html#tools So we'll need to revive that first, and iterate. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
