Skip to content

[ASTGen] NFC: Format with swift-format #69325

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 23, 2023
Merged

Conversation

hamishknight
Copy link
Contributor

This uses the same formatting configuration as sourcekit-lsp.

This uses the same formatting configuration as
sourcekit-lsp.
@hamishknight
Copy link
Contributor Author

@swift-ci please smoke test

@hamishknight hamishknight added the ASTGen Area → compiler: The ASTGen module, which translates SwiftSyntax trees to the C++ AST label Oct 23, 2023
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
{
"version": 1,
"lineLength": 120,
Copy link
Collaborator

@AnthonyLatsis AnthonyLatsis Oct 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI we settled on aiming for 160 here, which motivated swiftlang/swift-syntax#1714.

How about a symlink to the swift-syntax configuration file for everything inside lib instead? Consistent formatting across our Swift repos sounds really nice.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll let @ahoppen confirm, but AFAIK we want to standardize on 120 swiftlang/sourcekit-lsp#890 (comment)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

but AFAIK we want to standardize on 120

Oh, that’s new. Totally fine by me! I still incline to a symlink until swift-syntax transitions though. I’m wondering what we can do to standardize the Swift formatting in these repositories without having to maintain multiple config files.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, we agreed to use 120 columns. We should update swift-syntax to 120 as well at some point but I haven’t gotten to it yet.

I still incline to a symlink until swift-syntax transitions though

If we were to symlink swift-syntax’s config file to swift, it means that you can’t work on swift-syntax as a standalone package anymore. Similar for sourcekit-lsp. I think the best thing to do, is to have a separate config file in each repo and add a CI check that all the config files are the same.

Copy link
Collaborator

@AnthonyLatsis AnthonyLatsis Oct 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we were to symlink swift-syntax’s config file to swift, it means that you can’t work on swift-syntax as a standalone package anymore.

I meant the symlink to be in the swift repository and link to the swift-syntax or sourcekit-lsp config file.

I think the best thing to do, is to have a separate config file in each repo and add a CI check that all the config files are the same.

Alternatively, maybe we could create a special repo to host this kind of stuff and add it as a git submodule to other repos. Then each repo can replace their own config files with symlinks to the config files in that submodule.

Copy link
Member

@ahoppen ahoppen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I’ve got a few places where I think that swift-format’s default line wrapping behavior can be improved but I’m fine with adjusting them in a follow-up PR if you want to merge this to unblock other PRs.

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
{
"version": 1,
"lineLength": 120,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, we agreed to use 120 columns. We should update swift-syntax to 120 as well at some point but I haven’t gotten to it yet.

I still incline to a symlink until swift-syntax transitions though

If we were to symlink swift-syntax’s config file to swift, it means that you can’t work on swift-syntax as a standalone package anymore. Similar for sourcekit-lsp. I think the best thing to do, is to have a separate config file in each repo and add a CI check that all the config files are the same.

@hamishknight
Copy link
Contributor Author

Merging so I can base #69326 on main, will do a follow-up for the formatting fixups

@hamishknight hamishknight merged commit bfb36e4 into swiftlang:main Oct 23, 2023
@hamishknight hamishknight deleted the rm-rf branch October 23, 2023 16:57
@hamishknight
Copy link
Contributor Author

Opened #69336 for the formatting tweaks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ASTGen Area → compiler: The ASTGen module, which translates SwiftSyntax trees to the C++ AST
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants