Re: Xen Coding style

[Jürgen Groß <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 08.05.20 14:55, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:21 AM Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > On 08/05/2020 12:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > On 08.05.2020 12:00, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > > You seem to be the maintainer with the most unwritten rules. Would
> > > > you mind to have a try at writing a coding style based on it?
> > > On the basis that even small, single aspect patches to CODING_STYLE
> > > have been ignored [1],
> > Your thread is one of the example why I started this thread. Agreeing on
> > specific rule doesn't work because it either result to bikesheding or
> > there is not enough interest to review rule by rule.
> >
> > > I don't think this would be a good use of my
> > > time.
> > I would have assumed that the current situation (i.e
> > nitpicking/bikeshedding on the ML) is not a good use of your time :).
> >
> > I would be happy to put some effort to help getting the coding style
> > right, however I believe focusing on an overall coding style would value
> > everyone's time better than a rule by rule discussion.
> >
> > > If I was promised (reasonable) feedback, I could take what I
> > > have and try to add at least a few more things based on what I find
> > > myself commenting on more frequently. But really I'd prefer it to
> > > be done the other way around - for people to look at the patches
> > > already sent, and for me to only subsequently send more. After all,
> > > if already those adjustments are controversial, I don't think we
> > > could settle on others.
> > While I understand this requires another investment from your part, I am
> > afraid it is going to be painful for someone else to go through all the
> > existing coding style bikeshedding and infer your unwritten rules.
> >
> > It might be more beneficial for that person to pursue the work done by
> > Tamas and Viktor in the past (see my previous e-mail). This may mean to
> > adopt an existing coding style (BSD) and then tweak it.
> Thanks Julien for restarting this discussion. IMHO agreeing on a set
> of style rules ahead and then applying universally all at once is not
> going to be productive since we are so all over the place. Instead, I
> would recommend we start piece-by-piece. We introduce a baseline style
> checker, then maintainers can decide when and if they want to move
> their code-base to be under the automated style checker. That way we
> have a baseline and each maintainer can decide on their own term when
> they want to have their files be also style checked and in what form.
> The upside of this route I think is pretty clear: we can have at least
> partial automation even while we figure out what to do with some of
> the more problematic files and quirks that are in our code-base. I
> would highly prefer this route since I would immediately bring all
> files I maintain over to the automated checker just so I never ever
> have to deal with this again manually. What style is in use to me
> really doesn't matter, BSD was very close with some minor tweaks, or
> even what we use to check the style just as long as we have
> _something_.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have a patch checker instead and accept
only patches which change code according to the style guide? This
wouldn't require to change complete files at a time.


Juergen