*`;` in INI values* There was some discussion on the team on whether `;` or `,` would be better separators. `;` seemed a more in-your-face separator than `,` which, since this is a weird new thing we are doing, adding multiple options, seemed like a good idea. I am not aware of any INI format that chooses one over the other, but will happily look into that. Are you aware of any problems in other editorconfig parsers with this notation?
*`.` notation for making a hierarchy in INI keys and INI hierarchy in general* Naming styles need to be hierarchical in some way. Normally INI files specify hierarchy like this <https://gist.github.com/pksunkara/988716#file-gitconfig-L39> where you have some [header "name"] and then later specify this under [header] like you do for difftool in gitconfig. Would this be preferable? Wouldn't it be ambiguous with editorconfigs globs for files? I can't say I am in love with the current syntax, but I was unable to find anything clearer without being ambiguous with other options. *How will the options in the Code Style Options section work? Is both `true`/`false` and another option provided in the same key? How does that look? Is a `;` used?* The thinking is that it would look something like this: csharp_style_this_qualification_for_field = true;warning csharp_style_this_qualification_for_field = false;warning It might make more sense for this to be yes/no instead of true/false. As false implies doing the opposite (not wanting a `this` to qualify fields and giving a warning when that happens). I'll update the gist. On Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 12:43:34 PM UTC-7, Trey Hunner wrote: > Hi Jonathon! > > I second Hong's thought that EditorConfig won't personally be adopting > these options as official, but I think it still makes sense to discuss how > they fit in with other options and whether they conform to typical > EditorConfig conventions. > > One difficulty I'm having in judging how the options feel is that you're > doing a couple things we haven't done yet (hierarchical keys, multi-valued > options, etc.). If others invent options that require similar needs in the > future, it would be convenient if we could recommend a common convention > for handling these cases. > > So looking at the Gist > <https://gist.github.com/jmarolf/0e165b27a498b49e3b3512004ea9d8b8>... > > I'm pondering the `;` in INI values and the `.` notation for making a > hierarchy in INI keys. > > I'm mostly curious about the thought that went into those decisions > because I haven't seen the EditorConfig format used in a similar way yet. > > What was the reason for choosing `;` over `,` or other separators? Have > you found pre-existing INI conventions for multi-valued INI properties or > did you need to invent a convention from scratch? > > I haven't dealt with hierarchical INI keys before. Is `.` common for INI > hierarchies? Did you choose that format because it seemed more > variable-like (in many OOP languages at least)? > > How will the options in the Code Style Options section work? Is both > `true`/`false` and another option provided in the same key? How does that > look? Is a `;` used? > > Any other things I may have missed asking about? > > On 11/02/2016 09:34 PM, Hong Xu wrote: > > On 2016-11-02 Wed 18:35 GMT-0700, 'Jonathon Marolf' via EditorConfig > <[email protected]> <javascript:> wrote: > > > Hello editorconfig community > > I am a developer at Microsoft working on the IDE for C# and Visual Basic in > Visual Studio. > > I am currently planning to add editorconfig support for most of the C# and > Visual Basic formatting options in Visual Studio. Note, the plan is to > eventually add these same options to projects like > Omnisharp<http://www.omnisharp.net/> <http://www.omnisharp.net/>so they would > be supported in other places > besides Visual Studio. I would love to get feedback from all of you on how > well my proposed set of options fits into rest of editorconfig and what > changes you would like to see. > > here <https://gist.github.com/jmarolf/0e165b27a498b49e3b3512004ea9d8b8> > <https://gist.github.com/jmarolf/0e165b27a498b49e3b3512004ea9d8b8>is > the gist with my proposed set of options > > > Hi Jonathon, > > Thanks for your work, it is definitely very valuable for the > EditorConfig community. I personally won't be against the proposal you > have attached; but the core of the EditorConfig community won't touch > the very language specific options. > > For the option dotnet_sort_system_directives_first, can you give us an > example of how it would work? > > Thanks, > Hong > > > > -- > Trey Hunner > Technical Trainer, Teacherhttp://treyhunner.com > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "EditorConfig" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/editorconfig. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
