couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bessenyei Balázs Donát <bes...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Reformat src files with `erlfmt` on `main`
Date Fri, 21 May 2021 11:46:42 GMT
Hi All,

I believe I've only seen +>=0s so far so I intend to (in the following order):
* wait for an ok from @Robert Newson and @Paul J. Davis
* add `erlfmt-ignore`s if necessary to #3568
* add a check to CI (ideally via `make`) to ensure `erlfmt` is +1 on
the PRs in #3568
* create a PR for 3.x analogous to #3568

Please let me know if I missed anything.


Donat


On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 2:27 AM Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:
>
> In general I am +0.5 on the entire thing, but would like to see Bob
> Newson or Paul Davis speak up. In the past they've been the most vocal
> about code formatting standards, and I'd at least like to see a +0 from
> both of them.
>
> -Joan
>
> On 20/05/2021 11:53, Ilya Khlopotov wrote:
> > Good idea Donat!!!
> >
> > Even though I disagree with some of the choices made by erlfmt I appreciate consistency
it provides.
> > The choices are logical. I really love that every decision is documented and properly
discussed. I did read PR in its entirety and in fact was not even noticed the ugly `->`
in the beginning of the line closer to the end of the review process.
> > I do believe our wetware would adjust in no time to new formatting. Given how easy
it is to reason about. I agree with Donat's observation that we are spending too much time
and emphasis on formatting issues every time we review PRs. I do believe it is a machine job
to provide consistent formatting. We humans are better at other things. All in all I vote
for adopting `erlfmt` for both 3.x and main.
> >
> > Also thank you Donat for providing validation scripts to make sure the re-formatted
code compiles to the same beam files.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > iilyak
> >
> >
> > On 2021/05/18 18:13:14, Bessenyei Balázs Donát <bessbd@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Hi dev@couchdb,
> >>
> >> To eliminate the need for formatting-related comments and thus
> >> unnecessary cycles in PRs, I've invested a little time to see if we
> >> could use a formatter on `main` [1].
> >> The PR reformats `.erl` files in `src` and the script [2] included
> >> shows that the compiled binaries match "before" and "after".
> >> The formatter used in the PR is `erlfmt` [3] which is an opinionated
> >> [4] tool so it's more of a "take it or leave it" as-is. (We could try
> >> using other formatters if we want in case people want formatting but
> >> think the choices `erlfmt` makes are unacceptable.)
> >> Some members of the CouchDB dev community already left some great
> >> comments on the PR and I haven't seen any strong opposition so far,
> >> but I wanted to make sure more people are aware of this.
> >> If you have any questions, comments or concerns (or objections),
> >> please let me know.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >>
> >> Donat
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]: https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/3568
> >> [2]: https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/3568/files#diff-7adfbc2d8dba4d4ff49ff2b760b81c006097f20f412ea2007f899042fd0de98a
> >> [3]: https://github.com/WhatsApp/erlfmt
> >> [4]: https://github.com/WhatsApp/erlfmt#comparison-with-other-erlang-formatters
> >>

Mime
View raw message