[Openmp-dev] LLVM coding conventions an the OpenMP runtime

[C Bergström via Openmp-dev]

I can understand why Intel would be strongly against a larger format,
can you give some data points for your use case? Besides just a
"feeling" what's the rationale for strongly against

Thanks

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Hahnfeld, Jonas
<Hahnfeld at itc.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I didn't: I'm currently in favor of NOT doing the conversion as also said in the coding standards. Full stop.
>
> However I just wanted to express that I'm not against (more precisely: strongly support) to do the reformatting when moving the code base anyway.
> I agree that this is a different matter and has to be discussed separately but it may be a compromise on this discussion.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonas
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C Bergström [mailto:cbergstrom at pathscale.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 8:20 AM
>> To: Hahnfeld, Jonas
>> Cc: Wilmarth, Terry L; LLVM-OpenMP (openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org)
>> Subject: Re: [Openmp-dev] LLVM coding conventions an the OpenMP
>> runtime
>>
>> Can we not compound two distinct and unrelated issues. Proper code
>> formatting impacts everything now and there's no blocker on it needing to
>> be moved.
>>
>> I'm strongly in favor of going towards a consistent style which is similar to
>> llvm/clang. However, if others feel strongly that it's disruptive I think we
>> should be sensitive to their views. I realize that Intel is maintaining two trees
>> already and I wouldn't want to make their job any harder, just for the sake of
>> cosmetic candy.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Hahnfeld, Jonas via Openmp-dev <openmp-
>> dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > Hi Terry,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > IMO we should for now stay with the current coding standard as it is
>> > currently consistently used within the runtime (4 spaces indention,
>> > naming etc.).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > That said, there was a proposal of moving the OpenMP runtime into
>> > parallel_libs (which I completely support btw).
>> >
>> > If the whole code is then recommitted anyway, I think it is safe to do
>> > the cleanups in that process.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Jonas
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Openmp-dev [mailto:openmp-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On
>> Behalf
>> > Of Wilmarth, Terry L via Openmp-dev
>> > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 6:18 PM
>> > To: openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> > Subject: [Openmp-dev] LLVM coding conventions an the OpenMP runtime
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > We are considering the possibility of doing a conversion of the OpenMP
>> > runtime code to better comply with the LLVM coding conventions in the
>> > mid- to late-September time frame.  This would most likely involve
>> > running the code through clang-format with the LLVM style option, as
>> > well as correcting any other glaring violations of the coding conventions.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > It would probably *not* involve renaming anything to adhere to naming
>> > conventions.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > However, we’ve noted that LLVM’s coding standards document says the
>> > following:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > “There are some conventions that are not uniformly followed in the
>> > code base (e.g. the naming convention). This is because they are
>> > relatively new, and a lot of code was written before they were put in
>> > place. Our long term goal is for the entire codebase to follow the
>> > convention, but we explicitly do not want patches that do large-scale
>> > reformating of existing code. On the other hand, it is reasonable to
>> > rename the methods of a class if you’re about to change it in some
>> > other way. Just do the reformating as a separate commit from the
>> > functionality change.“
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > This would definitely be a large-scale reformatting.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > So I just wanted to get some feedback on this before we make plans to
>> > do this.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Terry
>> >
>> > --
>> > Terry L. Wilmarth
>> > terry.l.wilmarth at intel.com   217/403-4251
>> > Intel/SSG/DPD/TCAR/RAD/Threading Runtimes
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Openmp-dev mailing list
>> > Openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openmp-dev
>> >