Re: clang-format

Alejandro Colomar via Mutt-dev <[email protected]> Wed, 18 Mar 2026 01:11:14 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.mail.mutt.devel
Message-ID	<abntCfaaoyXJl73h@devuan>

Hi Kevin,

On 2026-03-15T13:36:07+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> I've never used clang-format(1), so I don't know.
> 
> I think I'd use it unce to make the source more consistent, and then
> stop using it, as others have said.  After that, style should get more
> consistent, and new code would likely follow the existing style.
> 
> Then maybe run it once a year or so, just to check that everything is
> more or less good.
> 
> I have so far not engaged using these tools precisely because they are
> too strict, and that ends up making source code worse.  I still want to
> experiment with them, in case I can enforce some rules that are more
> simple and which have no exceptions, but I'm not yet convinced.

Okay, so I've tried today clang-format(1) for the first time, after
someone suggested it in a project I co-maintain, and now have a well
formed opinion about it:

It's pure crap.  Please don't use it.

I would like it if you could enable a few options that it would
diagnose, and ignore everything else, just like compiler diagnostics
have always worked.  But it doesn't work like that.

> > 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"?

I agree with Rene.


Have a lovely night!
Alex

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)