On 06/28/2013 05:37 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote:
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]>wrote:
What is the reason for this? I've not found any related rules in the
coding styles we support (llvm, google, chromium, linux kernel).
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote:
Author: nico
Date: Tue Jun 25 19:15:19 2013
New Revision: 184894
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=184894&view=rev
Log:
Formatter: Don't put a space after parameter-naming block comments.
Before: f(a, b, /*doFoo=*/ false);
Now: f(a, b, /*doFoo=*/false);
This style is a lot more common:
$ ack -H '=\*\/\w' lib | wc -l
1281
$ ack -H '=\*\/ \w' lib | wc -l
70
Clarification: I see your research, but I'm personally not convinced that
this is a better style, and that it's worth special casing it.
There is a golden rule mentioned in the LLVM coding standard's
introduction stating:
"If you are extending, enhancing, or bug fixing already implemented
code, use the style that is already being used so that the source is
uniform and easy to follow."
So the LLVM style of clang-format should in my opinion always default to
what the common practice in the code we have today is.
I can see that there may be valid reasons to prefer a different style,
but the right way to change/improve the LLVM style is probably to start
a discussion on the LLVM mailing lists to update the LLVM style guide.
Changing clang-format to implement an improve LLVM style that is not
documented anywhere does not seem to be the way to go.
Cheers,
Tobias
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
