Re: Any concrete plans after the GDB BoF?

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

Hi Andrew,

On Mon, 2023-02-13 at 11:54 +0000, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> writes:
> 
> > 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?).
> 
> I'm a little confused by your point here.  You (correctly) point out
> above that the output from black is pretty stable across versions.
> 
> But here it almost seems like you're suggesting that we should chase the
> latest clang-format because it doesn't (currently) support the style we
> use.  Which would seem to suggest we are hoping it _will_ change, which
> suggests output instability, which, surely, is a bad thing?  But like I
> said, I didn't really understand the question here...

Sorry, I was just observing that I believe the python with black case
and the C and C++ case with clang-format are not the same. I think we
are in agreement that the python case is probably fine (we just
disagree about whether it is future proof - I think we can use whatever
version of black, you are skeptical that the formatting will stay the
same). But for clang-format we don't have a format that seems
acceptable (to at least to some people) and older versions seems to
produce different formatting from newer versions.

Cheers,

Mark