Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

[Pavel Roskin]

Hello!

In order to encourage developers to use proper indentation on the newly
added code, I suggest that we accept the default style of GNU indent.
That is, the space after "!" should not be needed.  That's the only
difference I'm aware of.

Running indent on the code and then adding spaces after "!" is
ridiculous, in my opinion.  GRUB and indent are both GNU programs, it
should not be needed to do such things.

That doesn't mean that we should start reformatting the existing code.
Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to submit code that GNU indent
failed to format nicely.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Re: Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

[Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1795 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote:

> Hello!
>
> In order to encourage developers to use proper indentation on the newly
> added code, I suggest that we accept the default style of GNU indent.

I agree with proposition

>
> That is, the space after "!" should not be needed.  That's the only
> difference I'm aware of.
>
I ran indent on whole codebase. It failed on ./lib/LzmaDec.c and
./script/lua/lvm.c and issued warnings on  ./script/lua/ldump.c and
./script/lua/lundump.c
It made following changes.
1) Cut long lines. Not always in a sensible place
2) Added a space before parenthesis in __attribute__ ((...))
3) Put newlines after ^L, not around
4) Removed space after !
5) Fixed spaces
6) Added spaces before comment if comment shares a line with code
7) Merged short lines in arguments
8) Removed spaces before labels
9) Added a space after &
10) in initializations like
a = {
..
};
it has put { on new line and without spacing
Perhaps something more. The patch would be 77280 lines. If someone there
would be a way to check indent doen't introduce bugs we could run it
sometimes on all .c files.

>
> Running indent on the code and then adding spaces after "!" is
> ridiculous, in my opinion.  GRUB and indent are both GNU programs, it
> should not be needed to do such things.
>
> That doesn't mean that we should start reformatting the existing code.
> Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to submit code that GNU indent
> failed to format nicely.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Pavel Roskin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>



-- 
Regards
Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko

Personal git repository: http://repo.or.cz/w/grub2/phcoder.git

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2749 bytes --]

Re: Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

[Pavel Roskin]

On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 19:01 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:

> 8) Removed spaces before labels

Oh, I missed that.  I think we should follow GNU indent in the label
placement as well.

> it has put { on new line and without spacing
> Perhaps something more. The patch would be 77280 lines. If someone
> there would be a way to check indent doen't introduce bugs we could
> run it sometimes on all .c files.

I'm sure it doesn't introduce bugs, but it can mangle some code.

My point is that we should accept the code processed by GNU indent
without any additional changes unless GNU indent obviously mangles the
code.  There should be no coding conventions that GNU indent doesn't
follow.

I don't think we need to reindent everything.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Re: Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

[Robert Millan]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:37:20PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> In order to encourage developers to use proper indentation on the newly
> added code, I suggest that we accept the default style of GNU indent.
> That is, the space after "!" should not be needed.  That's the only
> difference I'm aware of.

What does GCS say about spaces after "!"?

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

Re: Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   > In order to encourage developers to use proper indentation on the
   > newly added code, I suggest that we accept the default style of
   > GNU indent.  That is, the space after "!" should not be needed.
   > That's the only difference I'm aware of.

   What does GCS say about spaces after "!"?

It doesn't say anything on the topic.  But it has a single example
relating to gnulib where there is a space used after !.

| #include "error.h"
| #include <errno.h>
| #include <stdio.h>

| char *program_name = "myprogram";

| FILE *
| xfopen (char const *name)
| {
|   FILE *fp = fopen (name, "r");
|   if (! fp)
|     error (1, errno, "cannot read %s", name);
|  return fp;
| }

Re: Proposal for GNU indent compatibility

[Marco Gerards]

Hi,

Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes:

> In order to encourage developers to use proper indentation on the newly
> added code, I suggest that we accept the default style of GNU indent.
> That is, the space after "!" should not be needed.  That's the only
> difference I'm aware of.
>
> Running indent on the code and then adding spaces after "!" is
> ridiculous, in my opinion.  GRUB and indent are both GNU programs, it
> should not be needed to do such things.
>
> That doesn't mean that we should start reformatting the existing code.
> Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to submit code that GNU indent
> failed to format nicely.

I do not have a problem with this.  Thus the space change around "!".

--
Marco