Re: clang-format

"Kevin J. McCarthy" <[email protected]> Sun, 15 Mar 2026 10:40:02 +0800
Newsgroups	gmane.mail.mutt.devel
Message-ID	<abYcAoNbHOJKzT1b@qinghai>
On Sat, Mar 14, 2026 at 03:29:39PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar via Mutt-dev wrote:
>On 2026-03-14T18:47:18+0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
>> > AlignAfterOpenBracket: Align
>>
>> This is generally the case in the Mutt code.  I think overall it looks nice,
>> but there is the trade-off with long function names and/or deep indention
>> where parameters start to not all fit within 80 columns.
>
>I tend to prefer manual adjustment of this.  Most of the time, it's
>reasonable to use the automatic alignment, but every now and then I
>decide to differ for some reason.

Yes, this seems to be the problem with format tools.  AFAICT, there are 
just two options, true and false.  I don't think there is a way to say 
"let them be", but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Rene voiced a dislike of formatters, especially when they are run 
automatically on a pipeline.  Perhaps we could run this formatter once, 
clean up the egregious function alignment issues, and then just leave 
the format config as "reference"?

>> > SpaceBeforeParens: Always

[...]

>I dislike this.  It becomes especially bad when nesting calls.  Here's
>for example some code I had to write for GCC, and how I would have
>written it without the mandatory spaces:
>
>	_Generic (typeof (_Maxof (const int)), int: 0);
>	_Static_assert (_Maxof (unsigned _BitInt (5)) == 31);
>vs
>	_Generic(typeof(_Maxof(const int)), int: 0);
>	_Static_assert(_Maxof(unsigned _BitInt(5)) == 31);
>
>The argument list is fundamentally attached to the function, and the
>lack of space makes that more evident to the eye.  That separate (5)
>seems lost, where it is in reality the argument of _BitInt().

I won't argue with this.  I'm used to the space before the parens now, 
after a few years of working in the code.  But when nested calls take 
place, I agree that it becomes unreadable.  And unfortunately the 
formatter does it for gettext parameters too, so we have calls like:

   getFoo (_ ("hey there"), 1);

which I think looks terrible.

I'm still very reluctant to change the default format after so long. 
But if I heard from some of the Mutt old timers in support, perhaps we 
could take the plunge...

-- 
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)