PERFORCE change 126745 for review

[Constantine A. Murenin]

On 24/09/2007 11:37, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:

> On Monday 24 September 2007, Bernd Walter wrote:
> 
>>On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 09:13:33PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Constantine,
>>>
>>>Thanks for your input and I _know_ that my code is not 100% style
>>>compliant. Most of the style misbehaves are probably there due to the way
>>>my "xemacs" autoformatting behaves. And I love curly brackets and
>>>parenthesis, by the way :-)
>>>
>>>My plan is to clean up all the style stuff by a small C-program in the
>>>end, because doing it by hand is waste of my time. Probably it will take
>>>less time to write that program than the actual manual edit when we are
>>>talking about doing alot of edits. It wonders me if such a tool already
>>>exists, because the code is technically OK.
>>
>>There is indent(1) in src, but it doesn't produce 100% style(9) clean
>>code either.
>>I usually use it as a starting point for very ugly formated code.
>>I'm not shure it will make things easier in this special case, maybe
>>just different.
>>But very likely you can use it to automatically fix at least a few
>>common points.
>>Enhancing indent to produce style(9) code would be a great feature...
> 
> 
> Hi Bernd Walter,
> 
> Yes, I think I will go for that. Start with "indent" as is and then extend the 
> functionality.
> 
> Some things I have in mind:
> 
> Automatic __FBSDID() at top of C-files.
> 
> Automatic "static prototypes".
> 
> Automatic comments before every C-function is defined.
> 
> Automatic use of typedefs when declaring certain device method functions:
> 
> static device_attach_t my_attach;
> 
> Automatically reorder the code so that it follows generic device driver 
> layout.

Automatic renaming of function names like hid_get_descriptor_from_usb() 
and usbreq_get_report_descriptor() into something less wordy.

Good luck! :-)

C.