On 16/08/2022 11:18, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
On 16 Aug 2022, at 10:25, Hugo Melder <ad...@hugomelder.com> wrote:
Hi,
Having a consistent code style is useful both for reading and writing code,
especially for contributors. The GNUstep base framework currently has a
.clang-format configuration file in the project root, but is not used. We could
use a configuration file from major Objective-C open source projects like
WebKit, or define our own formatting guidelines.
What is your opinion towards strict code formatting?
We have a coding/formatting style defined in the GNUstep base documentation
(coding-standards.texi), and we try to make everything conform to that standard.
However, I prefer *not* to refuse contributions based on stylistic deviations.
Rather I would prefer to thank the contributor, correct any issues, and
encourage use of the standard format in future contributions.
If the .clang-format could be fixed to implement the GNUstep coding style, it
might be useful for those of us who have it installed.
From using clang-format in some other projects:
- Having a machine-applied style is a huge improvement, it avoids any
discussion of style in code review (aside from naming of things.
clang-tidy can help a bit there) and is a big win for folks who are
moving between projects with different styles.
- There's some initial pain for anyone downstream after the first time
that you apply it, but this is reduced later on. Some editors will
automatically format things with a .clang-format style and this can
cause downstream people to introduce accidental diffs if a .clang-format
exists and isn't used.
- Different versions of clang-format produce slightly different
output. It's worth picking a version and keeping it as the default for
a few years and then moving forward.
- Enforcing clang-format compliance on PRs with github actions is easy
and means that you never have to review inconsistently formatted code.
David
