Hi!
First thing, I'm fairly new to nuttx so I might be off subject but here is
my hot take on this subject.
NuttX is offering support for a lot of boards, more than what DRUNX should
require.
Eg. stm32f3 family, offering support for all the boards would benefit the
boards more than the NuttX code
to avoid a style with
> 'half indentations' such as gnu. K&R is fine for me.
>
> But code compacity is an illusion. Well spaced code is easier to
> understand and maintain.
>
> So Allman would work for me too.
>
> Sebastien
>
>
> On 19/03/2025 11:1
Well, this is what I fear, working for something that may change anyway.
I cannot force this change, If we come to an agreement I'll continue the
work I've started, else it is just a waste of time.
Can we make a choice regarding code style?
Cheers,
Mihai
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 at 00:32, Michał Łysz
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
I do not want to change anything, I'm working on a linter.
It will only *report* noncompliance to a style, not *change* the source
code.
The enforcing part should only be imposed by code review, not a tool.
I'm not a supporter of automatic pipelines either, this compliance should
be manual work.
My
Hello all,
First, a few conclusions I've drawn:
* Keep indent checking fully decoupled, indent style may or may not change
in future.
* For the moment we'll keep gnu style. Code style change will have a big
impact over the code base.
* If it comes to change, Allman is the best candidate, this will
Hi Alan,
This discussion did in fact not start from a bug.
It just happens to have some spare time on my hands and I want to work on
something other than embedded.
I fixed some nxstyle bugs previously and saw this opportunity to work with
trees (as in data structure, tree-sitter)
I've started thi
> > > used a docker script to run the checks on every PR.
> > >
> > > Just wondering if it would save some effort.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Mark
> > > ---
> > > Mark Stevens
> >
after static
> initializers.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 8:52 AM Mark Stevens
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> 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
Then it's settled,
Thanks,
Mihai
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 15:33, Sebastien Lorquet
wrote:
> Hello
>
> I admit it was a bad idea.
>
> What I support is no change at all.
>
> Also, yeah, it's in the inviolables, thanks for the reminder Greg.
>
> Sebastien
>
>
> On 19/03/2025 14:23, raiden00pl wrote
Hi all,
I'm working to add support for the lan9354 switch for my application.
Looking at drivers/net/ only external mac devices are supported there.
It won't help me, as my stm32 mcu has an eth/mac peripheral.
Nuttx already offers support for mii/rmii interface, so my problem is just
device initia
11 matches
Mail list logo
