Propose the use of clang-format. #540
Conversation
|
Ah but maintainers don't want to customize themselves, we'd like to see the result of several options and then pick one :-) |
|
That's possible too. I didn't run the tool because changing formatting will likely cause pointless conflicts. |
|
How can I demonstrate the result of clang-format, other than by committing formatted files? |
|
Yo can upload here a .zip file with contains the different versions of one
file you find significant :-)
…On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Danila ***@***.***> wrote:
How can I demonstrate the result of clang-format, other than by committing
formatted files?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#540 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFrJ2Y65z0K9WS6nOnqfTm2qYlIs3Hufks5rIcbvgaJpZM4LOqdO>
.
|
|
Here is a link to a zip file containing three different .clang-format files and the resulting ccextractor.c file. The best-match style was written to try to match the current code style of the source code. |
|
I'm not going to merge because I'm quite torn here... I guess working on Python lately has made me switch my preference from 8 spaces to 4 for indents (which means no tab, which is not really C style). But I liked seeing how this work, so it's something to revisit possibly during summer of code, after all the team has spent a few weeks on C :-) |
* Add test for variant output files in PR comment Add a test that the info used to generate a PR comment handles variant output files correctly. Regression tests that output one of the allowed variants of the output file should be treated as correct in addition to tests that output the original version of the output file. * Refactor getting PR comment info into new function Refactor the code for getting the info about a test run for use in a PR comment into a separate function. This makes this function easier to test instead of testing the entire process of creating a PR comment at the same time. * Fix variant output file handling in PR comments Currently, when generating stats and a list of failed tests for PR comments, tests are only marked as passed if they exactly matched the original output file. This commit changes that by also treating a regression test as passed if it is an acceptable variant of the output file. * Add test for invalid variant hash Add another test to make sure that the change in 4e78b55aff5a6a3591059be2e64f91dedb978ef9 didn't accidentally cause the PR comment handling to mark all tests as passing even if they result in an invalid variant file. * Rename get_info_about_test_for_pr_comment nosetests appears to be treating get_info_about_test_for_pr_comment as a test to run because it has 'test' in the name. That causes the test suite to fail because it doesn't pass in the required argument. This renames the function so that nosetests realizes that it shouldn't treat it as a test. * Move dataclasses to models.py Move dataclasses used for representing info about PR comments to models.py so that all classes for storing data are placed together. Co-authored-by: Willem <github@canihavesome.coffee> Co-authored-by: Shivam Kumar Jha <code@thealphadollar.me>
2 participants
Clang-format is an automatic code formatting tool.
It would greatly ease the creation of consistent code: it follows exactly the rules in the .clang-format file. Style changes would be as easily applied as editing the .clang-format file and re-running the clang-format command:
The file that I'm proposing is a draft that can be easily customized by the maintainers to fit the code style they wanted for the project: I attempted to configure it such that it was similar to what the style appeared to be before.
clang-formatis definitely a command line tool that works on macOS and Ubuntu, and to the best of my knowledge, it's also available as a Visual Studio plugin on Windows.