Re: Any concrete plans after the GDB BoF?

Mark Wielaard <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gdb.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Andrew,

On Mon, 2023-02-13 at 11:54 +0000, Andrew Burgess wrote:
> Mark Wielaard <[email protected]> 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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.