Is it easy to run over the whole backend? If so, why not do that and post a gerrit review of the diff so people can spot check whatever files they are interested in.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Tim Armstrong <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to Jim's general approach. > > Maybe we should get a couple more people to try it out and give feedback? I > tried it out on a source file I was familiar way. > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Oh, and I should note that this file, right now, only handles C++. > > clang-format also works with Java, but that's future research. > > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I support incremental reformat, not bulk reformat. > > > > > > I think we should make this our canonical style, but I also think we > > > should be willing to update it sometimes. I think when we do update > > > it, we don't need to do a bulk reformat. > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Tim Armstrong < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> +1 for automating this. I think the style is pretty good even if it > > doesn't > > >> exactly match. I think it will save a lot of time wrapping lines, etc. > > >> > > >> What is the proposed approach to putting this into use? Will we just > > >> incrementally reformat things as they're touched with > git-clang-format, > > or > > >> try to do a bulk reformat? > > >> > > >> Will this be our canonical style? I.e. if a patch author or reviewer > > >> doesn't like what clang-format does, do we just stick with the tool's > > >> output for consistency. > > >> > > >> My preference is that we just do it incrementally and that we do make > it > > >> our canonical style. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Alex Behm <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> +1 for abandoning some of our style idiosyncrasies in favor of > > >>> easy-to-maintain automation > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Henry Robinson <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > I think this is great - really useful to have. There are some small > > >>> > deviations from our traditional style (see the review for a couple > of > > >>> > them). They really don't bother me, and I think it's much better to > > have > > >>> > automated formatting than to hang on to the position of a : in a > > for() > > >>> > statement :) But I asked Jim if he'd start a thread here to check > if > > >>> others > > >>> > agree. > > >>> > > > >>> > On 15 August 2016 at 15:18, Jim Apple <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > I would like to have a clang-format config file in our directory > to > > >>> help > > >>> > > new contributors understand how to format code and have a tool to > > do it > > >>> > for > > >>> > > them. Through the time I've been sending patches I've been > > >>> accumulating a > > >>> > > .clang-format file that seems to minimize the style comments I > > get. You > > >>> > can > > >>> > > see it here: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/3886 > > >>> > > > > >>> > > And you can save it and upload it to play with here: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > http://zed0.co.uk/clang-format-configurator/ > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I would love to hear your thoughts. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > -- > > >>> > Henry Robinson > > >>> > Software Engineer > > >>> > Cloudera > > >>> > 415-994-6679 > > >>> > > > >>> > > >
