Hi Bremner-- Thanks for doing this kind of cleanup work. Long-term consistency is worth the short-term pain. The main short-term pain comes from dealing with changes that are in-flight. As someone with a couple of series that are in flight, of course i'd prefer that you merge my changes first, before you apply this cleanup so i don't have to rebase. :P But i care more that we get the cleanup done, and i'm also fine with rebasing if you do that. (rebasing against a consistent codebase is easy, compared to planning and implementing features and fixes correctly)
rip the band-aid off! On Fri 2019-06-07 07:58:24 -0300, David Bremner wrote: > I'm pondering running uncrustify on all/most of the notmuch codebase, > but I noticed a few things that uncrustify does are either not > documented in STYLE, or maybe contradicted. > > 1) Should block comments start with '*' ? Uncrustify thinks yes, STYLE > is silent, the codebase says mostly yes. I think update STYLE to > match uncrustify here. > > 2) Should there be a space after '!'? Uncrustify says yes, STYLE is > silent, the codebase is inconsistent. Updating STYLE would be the > easy thing here, but I remember previous discussions being > inconclusive. I'm fine going with uncrustify's decision for these two points. > 3) Similar for space between '++' and '--' and operand for whatever reason, i find myself preferring these attached without a space between ++ and -- and the operand, whether as a prefix or postfix operator. If it's possible (i don't really know uncrustify) i'd like to have the codebase say both "foo++" and "++foo". But if it's hard to convince uncrustify, or if anyone else has a preference for "foo ++" i'll cope. > 4) uncrustify wants to move 'const char* foo' to 'const char *foo'. Yes, please. I prefer keeping the * next to the variable. --dkg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch