Open
Conversation
LinkTed
force-pushed
the
clang-format
branch
4 times, most recently
from
ccf700a to
35d6b7d
Compare
LinkTed
force-pushed
the
clang-format
branch
2 times, most recently
from
951dfda to
b6a1621
Compare
vapier
requested changes
Jun 6, 2022
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I create a clang format file with options, which I think are useful. This would make the development faster because the style code checking is automated. It seems that the style was not consisted through the files. The code is already formatted according to the clang format file. So, we can see the result of the style code definition. I am open to change the clang format file, if something does not look nice in your opinion. I also add a GitHub action to check the code format for PRs.