Re: Any concrete plans after the GDB BoF?

On 2023-02-13 12:52 p.m., Luis Machado via Gdb wrote:

> I think Mark's point is just that we haven't settled on a particular gnu-for-clang-format rule set.
> 
> Yes, there is a gnu style there already, but we haven't decide if it is good enough or not.
> 
> We just need to play with it for a bit and see if people overall think it is good enough.

I've voiced this before in private discussions, but I think never in public.  So here goes:

I'm in the:

 "I wouldn't mind using a tool, but I don't think clang-format's current output is good enough"

camp.