From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA38D3858D1E for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 12:43:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org BA38D3858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B80DA30067DA; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 13:43:45 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 13:43:45 +0100 From: Mark Wielaard To: Andrew Burgess Cc: Simon Marchi , Joel Brobecker , Simon Marchi via Gdb Subject: Re: Any concrete plans after the GDB BoF? Message-ID: <20230212124345.GH2430@gnu.wildebeest.org> References: <83485199-965e-7ff5-1dc8-d027b74b56f7@arm.com> <5924814b-2e53-da09-6125-48ac5a5296e7@simark.ca> <87mt5kunum.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87mt5kunum.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3031.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi Andrew, On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 05:13:37PM +0000, Andrew Burgess wrote: > Simon Marchi via Gdb writes: > > I would suggest mandating one version, and for that version to > > continuously be the latest stable version of clang-format, like we do > > for Black. When a new version comes out, we don't have to wonder if / > > when we move the next version. Someone just pushes a patch re-formating > > the code to the next version, if there are some differences. It keeps > > the overhead to a minimum. > > I dislike our policy of using the latest version of black, and would > argue that always using the latest version _increases_ the overhead, > rather than reducing it. Have you found the python formatting flagged by black "unstable"? The buildbot uses the latest black as comes with fedora stable and I don't remember it flagging issues on upgrades. But maybe it hasn't been running for long enough? It has been running since July last year. Are you running a much older black? Does it produce different formatting? > If I had a choice then, personally, I'd vote against using clang-format > at all, but it feels like there's a majority in favour, so if we do have > to go down this route, I'd rather we adopted the same policy as for > autotools and C++ versioning. That is, pick something that works for > us, and commit to it over the medium term. That way at least, I can > build a single version of clang-format and know that it's going to last > me for a while. But is there already a verions that works? I think that is the difference between the python black formatter for python code and the clang-format for C and C++ code. It seems for the python code there is a supported format that matches what is used, but for clang-format there is not (yet?). Cheers, Mark