From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 8IvXLtVPh2cUow8AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:04:05 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id BD9A41E100; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:04:05 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from server2.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 ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7518A1E08E for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:04:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8FB385357E for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:04:05 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0C8FB385357E Received: from angie.orcam.me.uk (angie.orcam.me.uk [IPv6:2001:4190:8020::34]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C741385DC27 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:03:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 5C741385DC27 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=orcam.me.uk Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=orcam.me.uk ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 5C741385DC27 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:4190:8020::34 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1736921001; cv=none; b=sc0oUu6Yusmt3aR84lQnlVbBplrLJW8QdrJbtpIK/i4ee9GZkN/aJz698/ectgRESPRwHWC5sho3gQTlJFEVU0Kty7JUCKlTzBBvmw6GOJbZRY7ENGEhDxF2DaFjEb7zqrCFtgNw+FXxP5011zV68OXnXEY6KDzsWn+pp+ihMFc= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1736921001; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HkR1VqXKCb2bYv0OmbmrtDYx+Mw0ga9dGESMpbaVhcI=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=hE5pyPGawOqEGM1p0wSnvBCZk4fzOYJjps2+12v3tsMzq1hwb+ObgVO+pKVVIdPCegQKSoCf4kZKgJDP17ZOajA3BPNILiZW0DFTJ8neKvmxE04+uMZA1Fae0hcJqqmyUoFopD4mKfXQScEEZFnI1LYBI3UJEsEEWCu/NRKW13M= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5C741385DC27 Received: by angie.orcam.me.uk (Postfix, from userid 500) id 41D6792009C; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:03:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by angie.orcam.me.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F84592009B; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:03:20 +0000 (GMT) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:03:20 +0000 (GMT) From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Tom Tromey cc: Simon Marchi , Luis Machado , "Aktemur, Tankut Baris via Gdb" , "Aktemur, Tankut Baris" Subject: Re: automated coding style tool In-Reply-To: <87msftuhd3.fsf@tromey.com> Message-ID: References: <86538dac-6c3a-4b9e-9de9-3906e645fa4d@redhat.com> <87y16vwbzl.fsf@tromey.com> <74c8b867-f5bb-48f7-9849-11d06e63a3d7@arm.com> <87tta2r5z2.fsf@redhat.com> <87tta1qq1i.fsf@tromey.com> <2985f4ae-33c0-4e02-8982-fa132f4d3741@simark.ca> <87msftuhd3.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On Tue, 14 Jan 2025, Tom Tromey wrote: > Simon> Also, if are missing some features to get the output we want, nobody is > Simon> going to magically implement them for us. And if we don't use the tool, > Simon> there's no motivation for us either to go implement the changes. I > Simon> think that the only way to get the ball rolling is to start using the > Simon> tool, even if the output is not ideal, and then if there's something > Simon> really annoying, one of us *might* have the motivation to go improve the > Simon> tool. > > I'm in favor of using a tool but my view is that it has to meet some > minimal standard of usefulness. I just think clang-format does not do > this. We have a coding style tool onboard our GNU Project already, it's called GNU indent and I think it would be consistent with our project to improve the tool we already have rather than seeking alternatives outside. FWIW, Maciej