al
> on compiler version wasn't the issue (the m4 definitions for
> ATTRIBUTE_PURE come from gnulib, and are under a similar ladder of
> #if); rather, it's that an all-caps macro that takes no arguments and
> appears after the func(params) but before the trailing ; of an ext
me from gnulib, and are under a similar ladder of
>> > #if); rather, it's that an all-caps macro that takes no arguments and
>> > appears after the func(params) but before the trailing ; of an extern
>> > function declaration confuse indent.
>>
>> By format
Eric Blake writes:
> I'm trying to run indent on the GNU M4 source code base before a
> release (it looks like gnulib added the ability to run make indent
> since the last time I made an m4 release). But one change that indent
> is insisting on is wrong:
>
> -extern
"De Lara Guarch, Pablo" writes:
> Hello,
>
> This is not really a bug on indent, I would say, but I am seeing differences
> in how C code is indented with 2.2.13 against 2.2.12.
> With 2.2.12, the code as it is looks OK, but with 2.2.13, it makes the
> fol
Hi,
I am recently using indent to format my C program. However, I found that
indent changes a file forever by adding and removing a space.
The C file I am using is attached as a.c, its base64 is:
dm9pZCBhKHZvaWQgKCpiKSh2b2lkKSkKewoJaWYg
KGIpIHsKCQlyZXR1cm47Cgl9Cn0KCmludCBtYWlu
On 26/11/10 13:15, Sergio Villone wrote:
> I am having problems in writing a manual of my own..
> Please could you share the groff source for tou "indent" manual?
> in order fo me to see how many things are effecfively made..
> the perusing of the groff manual hasn't be
indent doesn't make tea either.
In case my comment is too cryptic, it is not in the scope of indent's
purpose to change syntactic elements of the code. You might just as
incorrectly ask the vim team to do it ;-)
On 22/11/10 22:34, Dukeman, Gregory A. (MSFC-EV42) wrote:
&
1) will never happen. intent also doesn't make coffee.
2) This is basic functionality (or did you really mean y gets converted
to Y ?):
> echo "X = 1; y = 2; z = 3;" | indent -st
X = 1;
y = 2;
z = 3;
On 22/11/10 22:08, Dukeman, Gregory A. (MSFC-EV42) wrote:
> Hello,
>
No bug present here, see the -T option in the manual.
$ indent -st -kr -ncs *-T ULONG* ncs.c
#define unsigned long ULONG
void main()
{
b = (ULONG)a;
}
BTTW: Good programming practice would suggest that it would be better to do
typedef unsigned long ULONG;
instead of using the preprocessor to
ong-standing defect. The space makes the fact that it is two separate
applications of an operator clear. Your code would become much more
readable if you had
#define TO_BOOLEAN(x) (! !(x))
...
int
foo(int a)
{
return TO_BOOLEAN(a);
}
My opinions aside, why should I accept an (undocumente
I am very baffled as to why anyone would want to write "return !!a". Are
you sure you're writing C and not some other language?
On 03/04/10 21:00, Edward Hervey wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found a regression in indent 2.2.11.
>
> The following code
> a = !!b;
>
the form ``0b00101010''. Mostly
> used in embedded C compilers and gcc supports them too:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Binary-constants.html
>
> Regards,
> Colin Leitner
>
> --- indent-2.2.10.orig/ChangeLog 2008-03-11 19:53:21.0 +0100
>
;
> A patch (that should fix this issuer) was proposed back in October.
>
> At the time, it was pointed out that this case construct is not strictly C
> compliant but is more of a C++ construct.
>
> However a patch derived from http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-
> indent/20
I'll put it in the next release.
_______
bug-indent mailing list
bug-indent@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-indent
On 03/12/09 01:16, Simmons, Aaron wrote:
> I'm trying to build indent 2.2.9 from source, but am getting compile errors:
> source='output.c' object='output.o' libtool=no \
> depfile='.deps/output.Po' tmpdepfile='.deps/output.TPo' \
&g
On 26/11/09 13:15, Martin Kirsche wrote:
> When GNU indent (at least version 2.2.6 from cygwin and 2.2.10 from
> GnuWin32) is used on the following code...
>
> |void
> main ()
> {
> int i = 0b01010101;
> }
> |
>
> it will be reformatted into this ...
>
> |vo
, so
be careful using indent on C++.
Jean-Christophe Dubois wrote:
> Just curious: Is this patch accepted or is it inadequate for some reason?
>
> I got no feed back on this proposed patch.
>
> JC
>
> le jeudi 1 octobre 2009 Jean-Christophe Dubois a écrit
>
>> ind
Harun Abi wrote:
I realize it is popular on this list to make the claim of "indent is only
for c" but that is in fact, bullshit.
That is not a claim it is a statement of policy.
It handles c++ well in many areas because it is coded to handle c++ well
in
k9jen...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm using GNU indent version 2.2.10 on a Slackware 13.0 64 bit system.
>
> The texinfo page says any space between a # and "include" is removed by
> default.
> If you want to leave it the space, then one should use the -lps option.
>
Andrey Utkin wrote:
> Hi, and long life the GNU developers!
>
> indent inserts tabulation symbols into mid-line (for example, between the
> declaration and the comment). Having \t`s inside the line is unacceptable,
> spaces must be used for alignment. Tabs can take place in a
by running the source through astyle
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/astyle) using the command "astyle
> --brackets=attach --verbose RS-PostgreSQL.c" then through indent.
> After being processed by astyle indent did not give any error. You
> can diff the two files to see the c
w langdon wrote:
> I do not know how easy it would be to do this, but one of our users
> has requested that indent be able to remove unnecessary "{" "}".
>
> Some automatically generated C (produced by CIL) has many
> extra brackets, which serve only to clutte
I cannot reproduce the problem with indent 2.2.10 using x64 Suse.
Here is my terminal output:
*> indent --verbose -br -i4 -nut --line-length120
--comment-line-length120 --leave-preprocessor-space -npcs RS-PostgreSQL.c*
option: br
option: i
option: nut
option: l
option: lc
option: lps
opt
Adam Sampson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just installed indent-2.2.9, and there are a couple of minor
> problems in the source code that prevent it from compiling with GCC 4.3
> -- patch attached.
>
> It would also be nice if it had a GPG signature (like most other GNU
Ed Crenshaw wrote:
> OK I'm stupid, I see the CRs are in my C file.
>
> Sorry about that
>
Since Panasonic make some great products I'll forgive you ;-)
_______
bug-indent mailing list
bug-indent@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-indent
25 matches
Mail list logo
