clang-format: Update to 16 #2139
Conversation
|
Build size and comparison to main:
|
FintasticMan
force-pushed
the
update-clang-format
branch
5 times, most recently
from
c34df9a
to
88e5c64
Compare
|
Sorry for the force push spam 😅. GitHub doesn't have an easy way to test CI locally, so I just did it in this PR. The failing clang-tidy test is because the infinitime-build container still uses Ubuntu 22.04. I think the reason we use the docker container in that check is to generate the |
|
Yeah may as well do it all in one go I think, it makes sense to do the upgrade atomically |
|
I've actually just thought that we don't necessarily need to update clang-tidy at the same time as clang-format, they don't interact at all. I might just revert the clang-tidy version bump and keep this PR to only updating clang-format. |
FintasticMan
force-pushed
the
update-clang-format
branch
from
88e5c64
to
715a279
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. It makes sense to keep the clang tooling at the same version to me though - tools get installed at the same time so the versions will be the same on real systems. In what scenario would you have clang-format from clang 16 installed but clang-tidy from 14 - it seems like we'd be using a very strange configuration here
| @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ do | |||
| src/libs/*|src/FreeRTOS/*) continue ;; | |||
| *.cpp|*.h) | |||
| echo "::group::$file" | |||
| clang-tidy-14 -p build "$file" || true | |||
| clang-tidy-16 -p build "$file" || true | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If clang-tidy isn't being updated, this should be undone right?
|
I agree that clang-tidy 14 with clang-format 16 is a bit of a strange setup, but I think that it's fine for the interim while I get clang-tidy 16 working. |
|
Oh, what's up with clang-tidy 16? |
As discussed in #2127.
I've also updated the clang-format options to be compatible, and sorted the options.