[LLVMdev] running clang format on the Mips target

[Reed Kotler]

Hi David,

What kind of  "a lot of out-of-tree changes"?

You should push changes incrementally as you do work. Holding onto changes means that many things,
not just reformatting, can make them need to be redone.  We frequently clean up and rewrite
code to make it cleaner and easier to maintain.

We are moving to a more strict internal review and pushing of changes and post commit reviewing.

It takes time to review and respond to comments on formatting issues; time that would be better spent doing new work.

So we would like to have robots, i.e. clang format, do this checking and such.

I would recommend that you start to submit your patches for review.


Reed

________________________________________
From: Dr D. Chisnall [dc552 at hermes.cam.ac.uk] on behalf of David Chisnall [David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk]
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2013 6:43 AM
To: Reed Kotler
Cc: LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] running clang format on the Mips target

As someone with an  lot of out-of-tree changes to the MIPS back end, I would consider this to be somewhat impolite.  I hope to upstream the changes that are relevant to users of other MIPS-derived processors in the new year, and having large numbers of formatting changes would make rebasing a lot more painful.

David

On 20 Dec 2013, at 20:52, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:

> We are considering running clang format on the whole Mips target.
>
> Is there any rule against this?
>
> Is there any good argument against doing this even if there is no rule against it?
>
> TIA.
>
> Reed
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev