[llvm-dev] [docs][RFC] Style for "end namespace" comments

[Geoffrey Martin-Noble via llvm-dev]

I think James basically said the opposite: that we should use whatever
clang-format does and be done with it. Things that don't really matter are
one of the best cases for a style guide (accompanied by tooling to do it
automatically). Otherwise you get reviewers commenting as they did on
Carlos' patch. I would recommend that we encourage people to not comment on
such things, but having it tool enforced and consistent seems good.

On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 1:31 PM Philip Reames via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> I agree with James.  Both are reasonable, this doesn't really matter, we
> don't have to pick and enforce one.
>
> Philip
> On 12/6/21 12:47 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote:
>
> Both styles accomplish the goal of annotating what namespace is being
> closed -- and both are widely used within the codebase. So I think there's
> not an intrinsic reason to prefer one over the other. They're both fine.
>
> That said, we should update the coding guidelines to recommend the format
> which clang-tidy emits -- just to make everyone's lives easier.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:03 PM Carlos Galvez via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was recently working on a patch and was asked during review to replace
>> existing:
>> "// end namespace clang"   Style A
>> with :
>> "// namespace clang"          Style B
>>
>> After that, I got interested to understand what the preferred style is,
>> and found in the Coding Guidelines
>> <https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-namespace-qualifiers-to-implement-previously-declared-functions>
>> that the style is actually Style A.
>>
>> On the other hand, clang-format will automatically enforce Style B on new
>> code, via the FixNamespaceComments option, which is set to "true" for the
>> LLVM style. clang-format will keep the Style A if it already exists,
>> however. Most people using clang-format (outside LLVM) will probably be
>> more familiar with Style B.
>>
>> Additionally, I have seen the following usage numbers in the repo:
>>
>> $ git grep '//
>>
>> * end' | wc -l 6724 $ git grep '//* namespace' | wc -l
>> 14348
>>
>> So Style B seems to be more adopted. Therefore I wanted to ask - should
>> we update the Coding Guidelines to reflect this, and avoid these kinds of
>> style discussions in code reviews? If so, what style should be preferred? I
>> have a patch <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115115> for review and there
>> seems to be a preference for keeping both styles. Regardless of the choice,
>> I don't think this should lead to an urgent style change of the whole
>> codebase.
>>
>> Looking forward to your feedback!
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Carlos
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.orghttps://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211206/996aba6d/attachment.html>