On 29/05/2026 01:53, Simon Marchi wrote:
On 2026-05-28 19:38, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 12:21 PM Andrew Pinski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 12:03 PM Tom Tromey <[email protected]> wrote:
"Kevin" == Kevin Buettner <[email protected]> writes:
Kevin> This commit fixes this GDB bug:
Kevin> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34147
FWIW I think this should go in.
This is on my list of patches to review this week. I hope to get to it
today or tomorrow.
It would be fine to land it in gdb and then merge it back.
I think we agreed that common files could be treated this way now.
Kevin> +class ParseError (Exception):
I guess gcc doesn't use 'black' for Python formatting.
GCC coding style has a section on python formatting:
https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#python
But I don't know much about python formatting to say much there.
So looking into this further I see nobody has been following that either.
I don't know about the history here either.
Now I do think we (GCC and GDB) should standardized on a format. In
this case the folks who knew python the most in the GCC community I
don't see around any more. So picking up the same formatting as gdb
would make sense. And we can get the forge to do the checking there
for us.
In GDB we use the most up to date black version:
https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Internals%20GDB-Python-Coding-Standards
Thanks to this, there is no thinking or discussion about formatting, it
is lovely.
+1 for either black or its rust based cousin ruff which should produce
the same output.
Simon
Cheers,
Claudio
