From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id CAuoIfSqRmBxcQAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 17:53:40 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 877271EF78; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:53:40 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D0F01E789 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:53:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C693861027; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:53:39 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 02C693861027 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1615244019; bh=clEY0aX4TmDNWzDWFA9s4OpGubMOt9ULd9uRShvWJSE=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=DCMz8vjlV7KI43z2WC1ZJg2nmaj0innu5EOgcsiOcK0WeY+9Bm64xaHvnm4Pfq2ru uDobt4St6CKSBxDu0MvqZFIzzYooxIq+ncCGwK1BLwefpvhv1UmNlrckwq9sGzuyUE 9/5ywbffWDmJyOsYEFd15V4zeCRqYOjCWF5uuwsg= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 403A33860C3B for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:53:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 403A33860C3B Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 128MrT6A031367 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:53:34 -0500 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 128MrT6A031367 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D2281E789; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:53:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: GNU style checker for GDB To: David Blaikie References: <3a4748a5-8059-aa9e-a55a-3939dd569c36@trande.de> <278d129c-f27c-c47c-3e33-4a5a85cda855@polymtl.ca> Message-ID: <306ba518-b507-494a-a55a-178531df05a0@polymtl.ca> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:53:29 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:53:29 +0000 X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb Reply-To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Zied Guermazi Errors-To: gdb-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On 2021-03-08 5:39 p.m., David Blaikie wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 2:31 PM Simon Marchi > wrote: > > On 2021-03-08 3:39 p.m., David Blaikie wrote: > > If anyone's interested in investing some time in it, I expect clang-format would be open to bugs/patches to support whatever formatting idioms gdb needs. > > That's one of those things I'd really like to try, but will never have > time.  But I can at least file some bugs. > > What stopped me from doing so in the past is that the missing things > were really some things I would consider like oddities / inconsistency > of our style.  For example, we use space before parenthesis, except for > the `_` (gettext) macro: > >   printf (_("Hello %s\n"), name); > > If we tell clang-format we want spaces before function call parenthesis, > it (rightfully) inserts a space after the `_`.  To prevent that, I > suppose we'd need a way to say: in general I want this style, but for > this macro I want this other style.  I fear I'll be called crazy if I > request that :). > > > I think if you can point to a widely used style (the gdb (& binutils more generally?) codebase) there's probably going to be a fair bit of sympathy/understanding there.  Ok, I will. Worst case, the idea is shot down. I filed a first one here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49481 Simon