On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 6:09 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021, 6:59 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:48 PM Ida Delphine <idad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hello, >> > Please can you help explain what you mean by Adding a "check-style" target >> > to the RTEMS build system? >> > And how I could possibly go about this? >> > >> I don't know if this makes sense exactly to me. When compiling RTEMS >> it could be nice to have an option to check the style rules for >> compliance. This would be something to integrate in the >> rtems.git/wscript file most likely, as part of the waf build system. >> However, since checking style does not generate a target file, I don't >> know that this really is suitable as a way to verify style rules. It >> may be suitable to add a standalone script in rtems-tools.git that can >> be run over the rtems.git that creates a report about style problems. >> Maybe, a way to configure it to ignore some files or to add exceptions >> to the style rules for certain cases then could be possible. > > > If you have a configuration that produces the code formatted as expected in > certain directories, then if a change is made as part of normal development, > running uncrustify will result in changes to the file needed. In a way the > goal is to have a directory full of files that an RTEMS uncrustify > configuration does not change. > > If you have a script that can do that manually then we can easily add an > automated check somewhere in the process to ensure that directories that > adhere to the style rules continue to adhere to them. > > One thing to keep in mind is that there there are places where uncrustify > does not have the ability to format code the way RTEMS has historically done > it. we want the rules to be as close as possible to the existing practice but > we are willing to adjust practice if it allows the tool to produce formatted > output we can trust. > Also on the table could be modifications to uncrustify.
> On each point where this type of issue occurs, we'll have to have a > discussion about our Style versus what tool supports. It's likely indicates > we're doing something that's not common in the open source world. > > Once the delta between the output of uncrustify and the committed source is > zero, running uncrustify should produce no changes. Anything uncrustify wants > to change at that point would be a style violation and flagged. In a perfect > world it would prevent you from committing. > >> >> >> I think focus on 1 and 3 is better as a way to start, and perhaps >> something like the above can be the phase 2 effort. >> >> Gedare >> >> > Cheers, >> > Ida >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 9:45 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:28 PM Ida Delphine <idad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Yes I have. But wondering how to run it with the given configuration I >> >> > saw in this >> >> > thread(https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-October/062770.html). >> >> > >> >> >> >> If you download/copy the configuration into a cfg file, then you can >> >> use the examples from >> >> https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify#running-the-program and >> >> attempt to run it on some files within rtems.git/cpukit/score/src >> >> would be my suggestion. >> >> >> >> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 3:37 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi Ida, >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 7:36 AM Ida Delphine <idad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Hello, >> >> >> > Please do you mind telling me how to run uncrustify with the given >> >> >> > configuration with any sample file? >> >> >> >> >> >> What have you tried? Any directions followed/attempted or notes that >> >> >> you have taken would be helpful. >> >> >> >> >> >> I guess all the info that you should need is in Uncrustify's readme >> >> >> file. https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify >> >> >> >> >> >> Did you successfully compile uncrustify tool? >> >> >> >> >> >> > I'm a bit stuck. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Thanks, >> >> >> > Ida. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:34 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 2:28 PM Ida Delphine <idad...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Hello, >> >> >> >> > So I have gone through this configuration file and I think I'm >> >> >> >> > getting it. However I'm a bit lost in the reading the messages in >> >> >> >> > the thread. Do you mind explaining? Or we can start talking about >> >> >> >> > a way forward. >> >> >> >> > Also can you help me with some steps on how to test this by >> >> >> >> > myself if possible? >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> It may be easier if you go "up" a level to see the full thread >> >> >> >> context: >> >> >> >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-October/thread.html#62769 >> >> >> >> Then you can go through the messages non-linearly. Right now, the >> >> >> >> basic idea is to follow the steps outlined in the open project >> >> >> >> ticket. >> >> >> >> I think Christian has summarized it nicely in his recent email [1]: >> >> >> >> "I >> >> >> >> think the contributions from this project that would add value would >> >> >> >> be: >> >> >> >> 1. Finding a tool and a configuration that can do an RTEMS style or >> >> >> >> an >> >> >> >> acceptable close one. >> >> >> >> 2. Adding a "check-style" target to our build system. >> >> >> >> 3. Maybe add some kind of script similar to Linux "checkpatch.pl" >> >> >> >> that >> >> >> >> could check whether patches would need changes _before_ they are >> >> >> >> applied. >> >> >> >> " >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The proposal preparation phase should work through identifying the >> >> >> >> options and pros/cons for different tools while preparing a plan for >> >> >> >> how to integrate style checks in 2, 3 and thinking through the >> >> >> >> coding >> >> >> >> tasks for the summer. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Getting the style checking tool's configuration to match with the >> >> >> >> RTEMS style will be some effort, and testing it out and submitting >> >> >> >> some patches based on it could be a good proposal activity also to >> >> >> >> build some confidence about the tools that will be used. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We also have some Python style guidelines that might be worth >> >> >> >> addressing. Those are harder maybe, since the style refactoring >> >> >> >> might >> >> >> >> be challenging to review for correctness. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> For getting started, I would recommend that you try running >> >> >> >> uncrustify >> >> >> >> with the given configuration on some files in RTEMS, see what it >> >> >> >> results in. Play around. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [1] https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2021-March/065547.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -Gedare >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Thanks, >> >> >> >> > Ida >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 9:39 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> >> >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> See the related thread, and we'll have to discuss how to move >> >> >> >> >> forward. >> >> >> >> >> The existing approach provides an uncrustify script: >> >> >> >> >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-October/062769.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 9:47 PM Ida Delphine <idad...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > Hello everyone, >> >> >> >> >> > This ticket(https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) was proposed >> >> >> >> >> > to me and I'm interested in it for GSoC. >> >> >> >> >> > The first task there is to find a code checker or formater >> >> >> >> >> > that can produce results that match the RTEMS coding >> >> >> >> >> > conventions. It also made mention some tools have been >> >> >> >> >> > discussed in the past. Please I will love suggestions on >> >> >> >> >> > possible tools I could use to achieve this. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > 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
