-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 287
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
When to jump ship for new go fmt behavior? #593
Comments
I think that makes sense. So basically, no actions until 1.20 is released and then run go fat and clean up the doc comments and push out a commit with updated gh action rules? I can get behind that - thanks for bringing it up proactively. I wasn't even aware they had made this change. ...wonder why they didn't adopt markdown more formally, though. There's some subtle differences I think. |
I wouldn't call them "subtle" differences. |
LOL I was being "generous" |
Why wait for 1.20? The format changes are compatible with the rules for older Go, i.e. one can reformat the comments with "go fmt" from Go 1.19 and they will pass a format check with Go 1.18. |
Ah, I missed that. Nevertheless, at some point we need to jump ship the CI where the gofmt checks are done and switch to 1.19. Should we dothis at the same time, affecting future PRs, or wait? I would switch gofmt at the same time, as PRs need to work on 1.19 anyway. Am I overlooking something here? |
I would update all comments and move gofmt checking to 1.19 in a single PR. Then once that PR is merged, the updated formatting requirements are met and enforced. |
As of Go 1.19
go fmt
now has changed formatting behavior regarding go documentation comments, such as header identification using#
, bullet list, et cetera.As this will naturally cause a larger diff I would suggest doing this once and for all when Go 1.20 will be officially released, so that we adhere to the N and N-1 support rule. The github actions need to be adapted, so that we run
go fmt
checks on at least 1.19 rules.What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: