Has anyone looked at using a custom .clang-format file to see if we can get close to the NuttX style?
I’ve used this route in a couple of projects. I did have to compromise on one or two rules as I could not get the exact format I wanted. I thought this was worth it as it saved me writing my own tool to do the job. I then used a docker script to run the checks on every PR. Just wondering if it would save some effort. Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------- Mark Stevens Blog: blog.mark-stevens.co.uk > On 17 Mar 2025, at 11:31, Luchian Mihai <luchiann.mi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Nuttx, > > *--- Summary ---* > I've been in the habit of fixing small issues regarding nxstyle. > > One of the last conclusions drawn was that it does not tokenize the file, > which leads to limitations in checking syntax. > Please check https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15847 for further details. > > I am working on a new implementation of nxstyle using python and > tree-sitter for parsing and checking the source code. > Treesitter is getting more traction in the past years. Some editors are > making use of treesitter, such as zed, neovim, helix, and others. > GitHub uses if for code navigation > https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/working-with-files/using-files/navigating-code-on-github > So, I think it may be a suitable solution for nuttx as well. > > This will take a lot of work, but you can track my progress at > https://github.com/LuchianMihai/nuttx/tree/nxtool. > Please feel free to add any suggestions you may see fit. > > *--- Questions ---* > > 1. > I've also set up the work for an new tool, calling it nxtool (at the time I > did not know that is not a new name/concept), > Mostly, it's a "boilerplate" to add more subcommands under a common command > called nxtool. > Currently only a single subcommand is present, checkpatch, equivalent to > the present checkpatch.sh so basically call > *nxtool checkpatch file* > Now I've dug the mailing archive and found that nxtool, or similar projects > were proposed in the past, such as > https://gitlab.com/nuttx-upm/upm or > https://gitlab.com/nuttx_projects/nuttx_workspace_manager > But both of them seem abandoned or not actively worked on. > I feel like I'm missing some info regarding the work I'm doing. > Why did the work stop, what was the issue with them? > I saw mentions of zephyr meta-tool west, and they weren't bad, or against > tools alike. > > So my question basically is, what is the take of the nuttx community python > based meta-tool? > > 2. > Although I've already started investing time in this, I'm not sure how much > effort the nuttx community is willing to invest for enforcing > this custom coding style in favor of using clang-format and gnu style. > If I'm to add a new tool for enforcing nuttx coding style, I'd like to know > that there is no talk about deprecating this work. > > *--- Cosing words ---* > > As mentioned previously, please reply with any proposals, ideas, thoughts > you have for such a tool, if any, > or any counter arguments you may have.
