Hi Damjan, Thanks for clarifying. When I saw that the initial patchset did not contain the formatting changes, i thought checkstyle and fixstyle were involved in adding them. Sorry for the confusion.
-Matt On Thu, Apr 9, 2026 at 3:12 PM Damjan Marion via lists.fd.io <dmarion= [email protected]> wrote: > > Those cosmetic changes are not happening because of clang-format > misbehaving, > they are happening by authors (or authors AI agent) choice. > Those hunks can easily be reverted and verify job will pass. > clang-format-diff operates only on lines modified and connected > neighboring lines. > I noticed that AI agents tend to mess with formatting. > Many times so far I reverted this kind of changes before I submitted patch. > > Same will happen with code from “gnu indent” era which was touched in same > way before 80->100 change. > > Regarding 80->100 change, even linux kernel folks decided to relax it in > same way 4 years ago. > I am also using vim and it works nicely. Code is more readable as there is > less line-wraps. > > — > Damjan > > > On 09.04.2026., at 17:52, Matthew Smith via lists.fd.io <mgsmith= > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I was reviewing a patch (https://gerrit.fd.io/r/c/vpp/+/45456) and > noticed that there were a lot of lines where no code was changed, but they > were just reformatted to rearrange whitespace. It looked like the maximum > width of a line was increased to 100. I then noticed that the .clang-format > file had 'ColumnLimit: 100' added to it recently. > > If you look at https://gerrit.fd.io/r/c/vpp/+/45456 and compare Base to > Patchset 1, the delta of src/vnet/sfdp/sfdp.c is +16 -2 and it's pretty > easy to see what's being changed. Patchset 1 does not contain all of the > formatting changes. If you compare Base to Patchset 5, the delta of > src/vnet/sfdp/sfdp.c is +107 -112 and you have to scroll past a whole lot > of formatting changes before you find the actual code changes. > > I presume that src/vnet/sfdp/sfdp.c was added before the change to > .clang-format so it was formatted using a line width of 80 chars > originally. Now that it's being changed, checkstyle is enforcing the new > 100 char width on the file. I imagine that minor changes made to other > files will be subject to the same issue - checkstyle will require a bunch > of superfluous reformatting to increase line width to 100. This seems like > it has the potential to make it a little harder to review changes that > people submit since you will have to look very closely at which differences > actually change behavior of the code and try to filter out a lot of noise > resulting from formatting changes. > > Aside from the reformatting noise, I also usually find code formatted for > 80 chars easier to read since I often am viewing source files in vim on a > terminal window that defaults to 80 chars wide. Though I acknowledge that I > might be in the minority in that regard nowadays. > > Does anyone else think this might be a problem? > > Thanks, > -Matt > > > > > > > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#26948): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/26948 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/118744922/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/leave/14379924/21656/631435203/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
