Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Add project-wide .vimrc configuration

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 11, 2020, 00:43 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s2yBLD+4GTny-GxAuoUdg66zChebsKc=-V7AeOw+RTx-A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <X9I+eisn7sQuWZ1J@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 9:27 AM Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 25 quoted lines

>
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 07:55:55PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>
> > >   - t0 is specifying not to indent function return types when they
> > >     appear on a separate line. But our style is not to put those return
> > >     types on a separate line, anyway. Do we need this?
> >
> > Right. I recall at some point it was annoying me that types were auto
> > indented magically at wrong times. Testing "ts" that doesn't seem to
> > happen anymore, but it also doesn't seem to be working at all.
> >
> > Do you see some difference from "t0" and "ts" with:
> >
> >   void
> >   main(void) { }
>
> No, but picking it does seem to impact a larger example. If I open up
> wt-status.c and modify the first function to be:
>
>   static const char *
>   color(int slot, struct wt_status *s)
>   {
>
> then reindenting it with t0 versus ts makes a difference (and I do
> prefer the t0 behavior).

I see.

For some reason this is indented:

  void
  main(void)
  {

But not this:

  void
  main(void) {

> But we would not use that split-line style in
> our project in the first place, I don't think.

No, we don't use it, but I recall some problems when not setting it (perhaps pasting code with that style).

Anyway, I can't reproduce any of the problems, so I'm fine with dropping it.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras