I’m all for an automated solution for code formatting, so we can remove discussions/comments about wrongly placed braces or spaces from code review and can rather focus more on the content. But there will be still a need for some coding guidelines in other places (like auto usage, foreach and many other things).
Cheers, Lars On 18/03/16 09:52, "Development on behalf of Sorvig Morten" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > >> On 18 Mar 2016, at 08:48, Jędrzej Nowacki <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> So I think, that we should not discuss what is better qdoc or md. The real >> discussion is about tooling, what is the best tool to sanitize Qt code. We >> need something that: >> 1. Can work as a sanity bot >> 2. Can re-format the code by applying changes (git hook?) >> 3. Rules are easy to express and they can be exported (qdoc, html, fooBar) >> 4. Works on diff level (so it doesn't complain about the whole world being >> broken) >> >> Bonus: >> 5. C++, js, qml awareness > > >I’ve used clang-format on wip/nacl, with the following workflow: > ><edit files> >git add >git-clang-format ><review changes> >git commit > >Where git-clang-format looks at staged content only, and does not touch files >with unstaged changes. > >This would allow us to incrementally adopt it on a per-commit, per-developer >basis. As a matter of policy, “I ran clang-format!” should then be an >acceptable >response to style remarks on gerrit. (within reason) > >Morten > >Qt-like .clang.format: >http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtbase.git/tree/src/plugins/platforms/pepper/.clang-format?h=wip/nacl >git-clang-format script: >https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/tools/clang-format/git-clang-format > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Development mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
