Re: Xen Coding style and clang-format

[Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>]

Hi,

On 19/10/2020 19:07, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2020, Artem Mygaiev wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
>> Sent: пятница, 16 октября 2020 г. 13:24
>> To: Anastasiia Lukianenko <Anastasiia_Lukianenko@epam.com>; jbeulich@suse.com; George.Dunlap@citrix.com
>> Cc: Artem Mygaiev <Artem_Mygaiev@epam.com>; vicooodin@gmail.com; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; committers@xenproject.org; viktor.mitin.19@gmail.com; Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>
>> Subject: Re: Xen Coding style and clang-format
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 16/10/2020 10:42, Anastasiia Lukianenko wrote:
>>>> Thanks for your advices, which helped me improve the checker. I
>>>> understand that there are still some disagreements about the
>>>> formatting, but as I said before, the checker cannot be very flexible
>>>> and take into account all the author's ideas.
>>>
>>> I am not sure what you refer by "author's ideas" here. The checker
>>> should follow a coding style (Xen or a modified version):
>>>      - Anything not following the coding style should be considered as
>>> invalid.
>>>      - Anything not written in the coding style should be left
>>> untouched/uncommented by the checker.
>>>
>>
>> Agree
>>
>>>> I suggest using the
>>>> checker not as a mandatory check, but as an indication to the author of
>>>> possible formatting errors that he can correct or ignore.
>>>
>>> I can understand that short term we would want to make it optional so
>>> either the coding style or the checker can be tuned. But I don't think
>>> this is an ideal situation to be in long term.
>>>
>>> The goal of the checker is to automatically verify the coding style and
>>> get it consistent across Xen. If we make it optional or it is
>>> "unreliable", then we lose the two benefits and possibly increase the
>>> contributor frustration as the checker would say A but we need B.
>>>
>>> Therefore, we need to make sure the checker and the coding style match.
>>> I don't have any opinions on the approach to achieve that.
>>
>> Of the list of remaining issues from Anastasiia, looks like only items 5
>> and 6 are conform to official Xen coding style. As for remainning ones,
>> I would like to suggest disabling those that are controversial (items 1,
>> 2, 4, 8, 9, 10). Maybe we want to have further discussion on refining
>> coding style, we can use these as starting point. If we are open to
>> extending style now, I would suggest to add rules that seem to be
>> meaningful (items 3, 7) and keep them in checker.
> 
> Good approach. Yes, I would like to keep 3, 7 in the checker.
> 
> I would also keep 8 and add a small note to the coding style to say that
> comments should be aligned where possible.

+1 for this. Although, I don't mind the coding style used as long as we 
have a checker and the code is consistent :).

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall