On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 9:33 AM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 8:03 AM Sebastian Huber > <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: >> >> On 03/01/2020 17:52, Gedare Bloom wrote: >> > Hello all, >> > >> > Vijay noted in another thread that: >> > "For RTEMS, I don't see any preference mentioned in the docs for the >> > order or includes: >> > https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/coding-conventions.html >> > >> > In libbsd, however, the FreeBSD style guide is followed which has a >> > preference for the order of header includes: >> > https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=style&apropos=0&sektion=9"; >> > >> > Should we consider any rules? I would suspect that at least ordering >> > by API layering could be helpful. Lexical sorting is nice but probably >> > there will be some exceptions based on dependencies. >> >> I would use the Google rule: >> >> https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Names_and_Order_of_Includes >> >> It is compatible to the FreeBSD style (except the include related header >> first). > > > FWIW I don't like how they worded that. I think they mean the public header > files. > Related would include private header files which are grouped later. But the > rationale > makes sense as long as there isn't a conditional for "inside the package" > which covers > up issues. > > There is also the issue of defining conditionals like POSIX level, GNU misc, > IN_KERNEL, etc.. I try to do that before any includes. > > --joel > The 'related header' raises for me one question, which is how to treat *impl.h headers.
In general the style rules I have seen go from "general to specific" ordering. As mentioned, the Google guide makes one exception to include "related" header, which appears to be singular "the related header" implies to me (in agreement with Joel) the header that defines the functions of this source file. I suspect there would be no such "related header" in a header file, except maybe we would consider our *impl.h header to be a "related header" of a public header file? That would be one issue to clarify before moving forward with a proposal on header file order. Once we decide whether to use the 'related header' or not, I think we can define the rules following the FreeBSD/Google style and Sebastian's suggestion. We have the somewhat odd position of having both "kernel" (supercore) includes as well as userspace includes (C/C++ libs), so we can't just point to either of those style guides and say "use it". A bit of writing has to be done :) -Gedare >> >> >> -- >> Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH >> >> Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany >> Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 >> Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 >> E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de >> PGP : Public key available on request. >> >> Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> devel@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
