[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] CDT patch format submission
|
+1 from me ... I'll conform to whatever standard we choose. I don't
know if the formatter is the way to go (ie do we bother to retrofit
old code).
At the very least committers should feel free to reject a patch based
on "non-conformance" with either the existing style of the code being
patched or for new source files, lack of consistancy with other sources.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alain Magloire
> Sent: December 14, 2004 11:30 AM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [cdt-dev] CDT patch format submission
>
> Bonjour
> the last couple of months reviewing/integrating patches was
> harder then necessary because of .. formatting changes:
>
> - moving inner classes from beginning to end
> - moving inner classes from end to beginning
> - Some folks do not like anonymous classes and ... extract
> them to files,
> - glossing over the brace indentations { }
> - the "if ( condition ) " vs the "if (condition)" etc ..
> ...
> etc .. 'til ad nauseam
>
>
> So about to standardise on the "Java Builtin Convention
> [builtin]" formatter ?
> Or whatever format .. but let just stick to one ... please.
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
