Re: [dpdk-dev] tools brainstorming

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 07:54:40PM +0000, Butler, Siobhan A wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 5:16 PM
> > To: Wiles, Keith; Butler, Siobhan A
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] tools brainstorming
> > 
> > 2015-04-08 15:53, Wiles, Keith:
> > > One of the biggest problems with any style is helping the developer
> > > maintain the style. Using some tool does help and I have used astyle
> > > before, not bad code formatter. Here is a few that seem to be reasonable.
> > >
> > > http://astyle.sourceforge.net/
> > >
> > > http://uncrustify.sourceforge.net/
> > >
> > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gcgreatcode/
> > 
> > I'm not sure it's a good idea to convert the codebase automatically.
> > The coding style must be a reference for new patches and they must be
> > automatically checked with a dedicated checkpatch tool.
> > By forbidding patches which don't comply, the codebase will be naturally
> > converted over time.
> > 
> > I didn't review this proposal yet.
> > My first comment is that it's too long to read :) When a consensus is done, it
> > must be added with a patch with custom checkpatch addition.
> Thanks Thomas, agreed it is a bit of a novel :)- I will refactor with the comments supplied so far and post a fresh version tomorrow.
> Siobhan 
> 

Just wondering here, are we looking to codify what the current predominant coding
style in DPDK *is* or what it *should be*? 

There has been some good discussion on a variety of areas, but if we focus on
initially codifying what's there now, some issues become easier to resolve  -
e.g. discussion of commenting style, since only C89 comments are allowed right now.

/Bruce