On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Stjepan Gros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Felix Wolfsteller > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi >> >> On Thursday 20 November 2008 12:23:33 you wrote: >>> What I wanted to suggest is that proposed code formatting should be >>> based on some other popular open source project. That way it will be >>> easier for newcomers to use it, especially if the given style is >>> accepted in a large number of projects. For that matter I would >>> propose using Linux Kernel guidelines. There is CodingStyle document >>> that can be transfferend to OpenVAS. >> >> Do you have a nice reference document for that? A quick search resulted in >> too >> many documents, each trying to summarize (their own) coding style. > > It's included in each kernel release, but here is a link on a version > available on the Internet: > > http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.27.6/Documentation/CodingStyle > > And, while I'm at that, LXR is a great tool for cross referencing > source so it might be a good idea to use it on OpenVAS sometime in a > future. > >>> The second suggestion is that it should be (relatively) easy to do >>> automatic reformatting using indent tool. The reason is that it's hard >>> to expect that newcomers, but even experienced users, will follow >>> closely formatting rules. Using indent the burden of style >>> checking/correcting could be automated. >> >> Tim and me had a tiny conversation about that ( >> http://www.linux.hr/openvas/archive/index.php?d=2008-11-19#msg4375 ). >> Reformatting all the old code seems to be a bit destructive to me at the >> moment (should have been done directly at fork times). And for new files I >> would suggest that its up to the devoloper to use one or not. However, we >> could encourage the usage of one or another tool. >> But at the end, that is another discussion - whoever wants to summarize and >> give an opinion could open another thread. If the majority opts for >> automation and a specific tool here, I will of course include that in the >> compendium chapter. > > Yes, it's definitely destructive to change existing code, especially > in a short time period. It will probably take some time unit majority > of the existing code is adjusted. > > What I meant is for the new code submissions. Formatting can be > checked using something as: > > 1. patch source > 2. do the copy > 3. apply diff > 4. see if a diff is too big and/or complex
Oops, I have a bug here... The correct steps are: 1. patch source 2. do the copy 3. use ident on one copy 4. do the diff 5. see if a diff is to big and/or complex > > Now, I know the things don't go so easy in practice, but at least > there is way to try to do it. > > And BTW, my experience is that when I was reviewing patches, I was > losing too much time trying to align them to coding guidelines. That's > why I'm suggesting this approach. But them, some are more strict some > less, so it's only my opinion. Stjepan _______________________________________________ Openvas-devel mailing list Openvas-devel@wald.intevation.org http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-devel
