Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] recipes: Unify indentation

[Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>]

On Monday 15 April 2013 08:42:59 Joe MacDonald wrote:
> [Re: [oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] recipes: Unify indentation] On 13.04.14 (Sun 
18:30) Koen Kooi wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > Op 14-04-13 00:12, Martin Jansa schreef:
> > > * This change is only aesthetic (unlike indentation in Python tasks). *
> > > Some recipes were using tabs. * Some were using 8 spaces. * Some were
> > > using mix or different number of spaces. * Make them consistently use 4
> > > spaces everywhere. * Yocto styleguide advises to use tabs (but the only
> > > reason to keep tabs is the need to update a lot of recipes). Lately this
> > > advice was also merged into the styleguide on the OE wiki. * Using 4
> > > spaces in both types of tasks is better because it's less error prone
> > > when someone is not sure if e.g. do_generate_toolchain_file() is Python
> > > or shell task and also allows to highlight every tab used in .bb, .inc,
> > > .bbappend, .bbclass as potentially bad (shouldn't be used for indenting
> > > of multiline variable assignments and cannot be used for Python tasks).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
> > 
> > I still hate spaces for shell methods, but I support the reasons behind
> > it, so:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
> 
> I completely agree.  The only spot where I see this as being not optimal
> is something like this (hunk simplified for clarity):
> 
>  PACKAGES += "${PN}-ndisc6 ${PN}-tcpspray6 ${PN}-rdisc6 \
> -            ${PN}-tcptraceroute6 ${PN}-rltraceroute6 \
> -             ${PN}-tracert6 ${PN}-rdnssd ${PN}-misc"
> +    ${PN}-tcptraceroute6 ${PN}-rltraceroute6 \
> +    ${PN}-tracert6 ${PN}-rdnssd ${PN}-misc"
> 
> The former state wasn't great, but in general if I'm doing this type of
> thing, I'll tend to align them thus:
> 
> PACKAGES += "${PN}-ndisc6 ${PN}-tcpspray6 ${PN}-rdisc6 \
>              ${PN}-tcptraceroute6 ${PN}-rltraceroute6 \
>              ${PN}-tracert6 ${PN}-rdnssd ${PN}-misc"
> 
> Probably leaving such things as they are in the tree is more trouble
> than it's worth, but we could, I'd like to avoid restyling after a line
> continuation.  I won't object to the proposal as it stands, though,
> since on the whole it looks to be doing much more good than harm.

It has always been considered best practice to indent multi-line variables in 
the latter way with spaces only - however this is separate from the 
indentation being used within scripts.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre