On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 10:15 AM Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > I am adding Miguel Ojeda to the cc's.
Thanks Joe! > Of course you are welcome to try it, but I believe that > clang-format doesn't work all that well yet. > > It's more a work in progress rather than a "standard". > > I believe you'll find that the patch series I sent > ends up with a rather more typical kernel style. > > I suggest you try to apply the series I sent and then > run clang-format on that and see the differences. Indeed, it is not there just yet. There are a few differences w.r.t. the kernel style that aren't supported yet. However, for block/batch conversions, it is very useful. Luckily, one of the biggest ones (the consecutive macros alignment, and we have a lot of them given this is C and a kernel) is going away with LLVM 9 which is about to be released next week. > Ideally one day, something tool like clang-format > might be locally applied by every developer for their > own personal style with some other neutral style the > content actually distributed. If that day comes, I hope we can all agree to a single format and apply it everywhere as other major projects have done. I think agreeing to a given style is much, much easier for any of us when formatting is fully automatic -- because at that point you don't need to spend mental cycles (and memory!) on it. :-) If I had to guess, I would say the path forward will start with some subsystem maintainers starting to apply clang-format systematically on their trees. That is why I think it is very useful that Dan tries it out and let us know his impressions. Cheers, Miguel