Hello Samuel, On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:41:23 -0600 Samuel Holland wrote: > uncrustify is the most flexible of the three, making it the best for > matching an existing code style. It's also a bit buggier than > clang-format, especially when the tool wraps long lines for you > (though this doesn't affect code already following a line length > limit). I didn't know of uncrustify. Looks promissing. > I wrote a script to permute over 600 of the options to uncrustify and > generate a configuration with the smallest diff from the current musl > source. Attached is that configuration file, as well as a diffstat > from 628cf979b249. You can see most of the changes are in the inline > assembly syntax, continuation of header namespace guards, and the > imported code in src/math and src/regex. This sounds like a lot of work. Debian also has UniversalIndentGui which seems to be able to guide through the choice of different beautifier options. > I don't claim that this file represents the "official musl style", > especially because it's autogenerated, but hopefully it's useful for > formatting patches. Such patches could be applied as last before release, or first after, such that we have a clear cut. Jens -- :: INRIA Nancy Grand Est ::: Camus ::::::: ICube/ICPS ::: :: ::::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536 :: :: :::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183 :: :: ::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 :: :: http://icube-icps.unistra.fr/index.php/Jens_Gustedt ::