From:  "Nicolas B. Pierron" <>
Date:  11 May 2016 20:01:34 Hong Kong Time

Re: Clang-format


On 05/11/2016 02:15 AM, Jason Orendorff wrote:
>> instead go with Terrence’s suggestion and simply adopt the same style as
>> the rest of Gecko, including the 2-space indent.
> I've said before that we won't do this without talking it over as a team.
> Well, team? What do you think?

Massive changes are always bad ideas, unless these are used to eliminate 
classes of bugs/crashes, by preventing us from writing them.

Changing the indentation is the kind of thing which brings no value, and 
introduce massive changes.  So, I will always be totally against these kind 
of changes.

I agree that having a tool to *check* one coding style is nicer than having 
no coding style, as long as the tool is flexible enough to allow local 
inconsistencies made to make the code more readable.

> Personally I dislike the 2-space indent. But what matters to me here is
> eliminating a speed bump for both Gecko and SM hackers; and reducing
> pointless arguments on dev.platform.

If the problem are the pointless arguments on dev.platform, which are 
mistakenly considering SpiderMonkey as Gecko's property, I would totally 
agree on moving SpiderMonkey into its own repository.

I do not see how indentation differences could be a speed bump, and even if 
this was a problem, I am still not yet convinced this alone could justify 
changing 95% of the lines of the project.

One thing I hate with Gecko undesired continuous integration, is that we are 
hold responsible for failures in tests that we cannot reproduce. Having a 
separated project would make explicit the fact that someone is responsible 
for the integration, and for converting such test cases into SpiderMonkey 
test cases.  I honestly think I spend more time thinking about how I can 
reproduce some Gecko failures than anybody spent else spent about thinking 
about indentation.

Nicolas B. Pierron