Paul Spooren <[email protected]> [2019-05-14 18:51:55]: > On 5/14/19 6:24 PM, Daniel Golle wrote: > > I don't think adding formatter-information into the code makes sense > > at this stage, as this is meant for exeptions from an otherwise applied > > style. Here, obviously clang-format defintions don't reflect the > > current style. > > They don't, they reflect the kernels style (at lest, as much as I > understand using the .clang-configuration file). If it's ugly, it's not > a matter of clang-format but of the kernels code style, not?
FYI, quoting from https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/clang-format.html While it might be tempting to use this to keep a file always in sync with clang-format, specially if you are writing new files or if you are a maintainer, please note that people might be running different clang-format versions or not have it available at all. Therefore, you should probably refrain yourself from using this in kernel sources; at least until we see if clang-format becomes commonplace. Remember that you can always tweak the changes afterwards in those cases where the tool did not do an optimal job. But as a first approximation, it can be very useful. -- ynezz _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
