> On Oct. 7, 2016, 11:24 p.m., Brandon Potter wrote: > > Do you think it's worthwhile to adopt a more detailed organization for > > headers? > > > > Currently, we have this: > > 1) primary header (foo.hh for foo.cc) > > 2) mix of C/C++ headers alphabetically ordered > > 3) project headers alphabetically ordered > > > > Should we move to something like the Google Style Guide's ruleset? > > https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html > > > > It looks like this: > > 1) dir2/foo2.h. > > 2) C system files. > > 3) C++ system files. > > 4) Other libraries' .h files. > > 5) Your project's .h files. > > > > Having the primary header on top is useful, but I do not know what the > > other ordering provides or that it protects us against anything. It does > > provide more organization so that it's easier to identify an include if you > > happen to glance up at the header sections, but that seems minor and > > probably isn't their justification. Does anyone else have thoughts on the > > topic? > > Andreas Sandberg wrote: > With the exception of the distinction between 4 & 5, isn't this what we > are doing already? > > Brandon Potter wrote: > Yeah, it is the same except 4 & 5. I thought that 2 & 3 might have been > crammed together in our files, but it doesn't actually seem to be the case.
There might be a few other subtle differences. We actually don't distinguish between system files and other libraries that we depend on with the exception of ext. In practice, this probably makes very little differences since gem5 has few external library dependencies. I'm tempted to say that adding more organization to the header block isn't really worth it at the moment. - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3648/#review8795 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Oct. 7, 2016, 4:11 p.m., Andreas Sandberg wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3648/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 7, 2016, 4:11 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 11669:258c76f88f24 > --------------------------- > style: Add options to select checkers and apply fixes > > Add an option, --checker/-c, to style.py that selects individual style > checkers to apply. When this option isn't specified, the script > defaults to all available style checkers. The option may be specified > multiple times to run multiple style checkers. > > The option, --fix/-f, can be specified to automatically fix style > violations. > > Change-Id: Id7597fba6b65cecfa17a88b1c87c8a4c8315af59 > Signed-off-by: Andreas Sandberg <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Andreas Hansson <[email protected]> > > > Diffs > ----- > > util/style.py 380375085863 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3648/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Sandberg > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
