Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] rust: add PL011 device model

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:59:12AM +0300, Manos Pitsidianakis wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 11:53, "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:41:38AM +0300, Manos Pitsidianakis wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/rust/rustfmt.toml b/rust/rustfmt.toml
> > > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > > index 0000000000..ebecb99fe0
> > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > +++ b/rust/rustfmt.toml
> > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
> > > > > +edition = "2021"
> > > > > +format_generated_files = false
> > > > > +format_code_in_doc_comments = true
> > > > > +format_strings = true
> > > > > +imports_granularity = "Crate"
> > > > > +group_imports = "StdExternalCrate"
> > > > > +wrap_comments = true
> > > > > > > About the Rust style, inspired from the discussion on my
> > > previous
> > > > simpletrace-rust [1], it looks like people prefer the default rust style
> > > > and use the default check without custom configurations.
> > > > > More style requirements are also an open, especially for
> > > unstable ones,
> > > > and it would be better to split this part into a separate patch, so that
> > > > the discussion about style doesn't overshadow the focus on your example.
> > > > > [1]:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/ZlnBGwk29Ds9FjUA@redhat.com/
> > > >
> > > 
> > > I had read that discussion and had that in mind. There's no need to worry
> > > about format inconsistencies; these options are unstable  -nightly only-
> > > format options and they don't affect the default rust style (they actually
> > > follow it). If you run a stable cargo fmt you will see the code won't change
> > > (but might complain that these settings are nightly only).
> > > 
> > > What they do is extra work on top of the default style. If anything ends up
> > > incompatible with stable I agree it must be removed, there's no sense in
> > > having a custom Rust style when the defaults are so reasonable.
> > 
> > This doesn't make sense. One the one hand you're saying the rules don't
> > have any effect on the code style vs the default, but on the otherhand
> > saying they do "extra work" on top of the default style. Those can't
> > both be true.
> 
> No, I fear there's a confusion here. It means that if you run the stable
> rustfmt with the default options the code doesn't change. I.e. it does not
> conflict with the default style.
> 
> What it does is group imports, format text in doc comments (which stable
> rustfmt doesn't touch at all) and also splits long strings into several
> lines, which are all helpful for e-mail patch reviews.

Ah ok.  Are we expecting these options to become part of stable rustfmt ?

I would expect our contributors to primarily be using the Rust toolchain
that comes with their distro, and not unstable -nightly toolchain. So I
still wonder if this rustfmt config will have much real world benefit ?


With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|