Hello Ida and Gedare,
On 06/05/2021 06:26, Gedare Bloom wrote:
hi Ida,
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 3:21 PM Ida Delphine <idad...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello everyone,
Regarding this project (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) I went with clang-format as
we all agreed. I have tested it on some "score" files and it made some changes
which I don't think are very much in line with the RTEMS coding style. However, it wasn't
really clear if we will chage the RTEMS coding style or try to make changes to
clang-format to fit the style.
Please will love to know the best option.
We will likely need to consider our choices carefully. If we can find
a suitably close style that is already well-supported by clang, and
get consensus from the maintainers on a change, then that might be the
best route forward.
+1
I think the first thing to do is take the examples
that have been shown by Sebastian that are "close" but not quite
perfect, and identify the cases where they differ with RTEMS style in
order to present for discussion here. If consensus can't be reached to
change the style, then we would need to have a plan for how to improve
the existing tools for what we have.
I also found the following tool quite useful to play with the clang
style config:
https://zed0.co.uk/clang-format-configurator/
Maybe it can help a bit to find out what certain options mean.
However, I think there is interest in doing less work on the tool
side, and more work on how to integrate it into our workflows better.
+1
Cheers,
Ida.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
