Hi Zoli and others, Am Wed, 24 Jan 2018 21:33:43 +0100 schrieb Csahok Zoltan <ha5...@freemail.hu>:
> Hi, > > Another topic: as the code has grown over the time and many authors > contributed to it the formatting is inherently not consistent. > The most inconsistencies are not from contributions in last years but left over from former code in sections we did not change (e.g. audio.c). I put quite some work to bring it at least to a mimimum level of quality and to keep it there (for comparison you may have a look at the old 0.9.34). But anyway I find it a good idea to automate it as much as possible. I used mostly universalindentgui for that, but with the switch to QT5 it no longer compiles. So 'indent', 'astyle', 'bcpp' or similar may be best. > GNU indent is a powerful tool for C source formatting and present in > any modern Linux distro. We could define a common style simply by > setting up an .indent.pro file. > see http://www.gnu.org/software/indent/manual/indent.html#SEC4 > For a similar way you can look up the hamlib mailing list. They use astyle now. > I have no particular formatting preferences provided that tab size is > 4. Any suggestions? I would recommend to choose the settings so, that it reflects the actual code base best and needs no big reformatting session over the whole project. I will look for my setting for the universalindentgui and post it here. By 'tab size' do you mean the size of a tab character or the indentation size normally inserted by tab. For tab characters I am strongly against a size of 4 as it is not the default setting in ALL editors and/or viewers. Tab was and is always 8. Then it would be better to deny tabs at all and replace it by spaces. 4 as indentation size is what we used mostly in the code. That is a good compromise between line size and nesting depth. There are two other points I would suggest: - We should not only look for common formatting rules but additionally define some naming schemes for variables, typedefs and functions. We already have quite a mix in the code, but should use a common scheme for new code and migrate the old one step by step. - I further had a look into the Travis CI which integrates neatly with the github working flow. Maybe we should use it to do common checks on the code automatically. What do you think? 73, Tom DL1JBE -- "Do what is needful!" Ursula LeGuin: Earthsea -- _______________________________________________ Tlf-devel mailing list Tlf-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tlf-devel