[Gluster-Maintainers] [Gluster-devel] Clang-Formatter for GlusterFS.

[Hari Gowtham]

I see that the procedure mentioned in the coding standard document is buggy.

git show --pretty="format:" --name-only | grep -v "contrib/" | egrep
"*\.[ch]$" | xargs clang-format -i

The above command edited the whole file. which is not supposed to happen.

+1 for the readability of the code having been affected.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 10:45 AM Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 10:00 AM, Ravishankar N <ravishankar at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 09/13/2018 03:34 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 02:25:22PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> What rules does clang impose on function/argument wrapping and alignment? I
>>>> somehow found the new code wrapping to be random and highly unreadable. An
>>>> example of 'before and after' the clang format patches went in:
>>>> https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/dC~aRCzYgliqucGYIzxPrQ Wondering if
>>>> this is just me or is it some problem of spurious clang fixes.
>>>
>>> I agree that this example looks pretty ugly. Looking at random changes
>>> to the code where I am most active does not show this awkward
>>> formatting.
>>
>>
>> So one of my recent patches is failing smoke and clang-format is insisting [https://build.gluster.org/job/clang-format/22/console] on wrapping function arguments in an unsightly manner. Should I resend my patch with this new style of wrapping ?
>>
>
> I would say yes! We will get better, by changing options of clang-format once we get better options there. But for now, just following the option suggested by clang-format job is good IMO.
>
> -Amar
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ravi
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> However, I was expecting to see enforcing of the
>>> single-line-if-statements like this (and while/for/.. loops):
>>>
>>>      if (need_to_do_it) {
>>>           do_it();
>>>      }
>>>
>>> instead of
>>>
>>>      if (need_to_do_it)
>>>           do_it();
>>>
>>> At least the conversion did not take care of this. But, maybe I'm wrong
>>> as I can not find the discussion in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1564149
>>> about this. Does someone remember what was decided in the end?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Niels
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Amar Tumballi (amarts)
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel



-- 
Regards,
Hari Gowtham.