I think automation is very important. If we should slightly change our style in order to set-up easily enforceable rules, I vote with both hands for that.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Michael Park <[email protected]> wrote: > Oops, sorry I was so excited that this could just solve the issue that I > forgot to answer your question. > > In general, the clang-format strives to adopt widely used styles, which I'm > not sure if we would be considered widely used. Aside from that, another > concern was that it could take a while for our style proposals to make it > upstream and for it to be useful. > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015, 6:12 PM Michael Park <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Is it worth adding our own style? > > > > > > > > I noticed other have (LLVM, Google, Chromium, Mozilla, WebKit.). How > >> hard is it? > > > > > > I was just looking into this again and *Mozilla* was added as the newest > > *BreakBeforeBraces* style. It breaks before braces on enum, function, and > > record definitions (struct, class, union). I think we can actually use > that > > one and be done with it. Having looked through the codebase, we wrap the > > braces for *enum* for about half of the cases. It would be about 35 > > instances that we have to fix from what I can see in our codebase. What > do > > you think? > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:14 PM Benjamin Mahler < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Is it worth adding our own style? > >> > >> I noticed other have (LLVM, Google, Chromium, Mozilla, WebKit.). How > hard > >> is it? > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Michael Park <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > There are a few syntactical Mesos style guidelines that I would like > to > >> > propose to drop. They are: > >> > > >> > 1. Open braces for namespace should not be wrapped. > >> > *NOTE*: The Google style guide does not wrap the brace after > >> > *namespace*, > >> > and the Mesos style guide does not mention a rule at all. But it is > >> > consistent throughout the codebase. > >> > 2. Overloaded operators should be padded with spaces. > >> > 3. Comments should be wrapped at 70 characters. > >> > > >> > The main motivation is that as a community we would like to reduce the > >> > discrepancy between what *clang-format* produces. This is a dual > >> effort, as > >> > we work on improving *clang-format* to support some of our style which > >> is > >> > popular in the C++ community as well. Wrapping the function arguments > to > >> > avoid "jaggedness" for example is a feature request which is being > >> tracked > >> > at: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23422 > >> > > >> > Going forward, the proposal is to update all of the instances of (1) > and > >> > (2) at once. For (3), we can simply relax the constraint from 70 to 80 > >> > without touching the existing comments. > >> > > >> > Does anyone have any strong opinions about dropping any of the 3 rules > >> > above? > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > > >> > MPark. > >> > > >> > > >
