Skip to content

Conversation

@arng40
Copy link
Contributor

@arng40 arng40 commented Nov 18, 2025

This PR aim to create a new CI Target in order to ensure the use of the internal tool in geos and to promote the best coding practice.
First, this PR set up the CI check_code_rules and will ensure the use of : stdMap, stdUnorderedMap& stdVector
This PR will be merged after :

@arng40 arng40 self-assigned this Nov 18, 2025
@arng40 arng40 added type: CI Concerns github workflows or generic CI DO NOT MERGE ! flag: no rebaseline Does not require rebaseline labels Nov 18, 2025
@MelReyCG MelReyCG changed the title feat: CI - Add code rules checking script feat: CI - Add code rules checking action Nov 27, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@MelReyCG MelReyCG left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think you showed that script works, but it seems that there are some critical issues in it.

Comment on lines +153 to +154
- name: Check the code rules
run: "scripts/check_code_rules.sh"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is it no longer grouped with the code style & docs?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's not executed the same way as code style & docs

Copy link
Contributor

@MelReyCG MelReyCG Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, why isn't it executed the same way? I don't know why the process has to be different than uncrustify check.

And, if it have to remain a job, why isn't check_code_rules in check_that_all_jobs_succeeded? As you're proposing, it is only advisory.

fi
done

EXCLUDE_EXPRESSION=()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm confused, does it excludes?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I make it clearer

Copy link
Contributor

@MelReyCG MelReyCG Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
EXCLUDE_EXPRESSION=()
EXCLUDED_NAMES=()
Suggested change
EXCLUDE_EXPRESSION=()
EXCLUDED_NAME_PATTERNS_=()

@arng40 arng40 requested review from MelReyCG and jafranc December 8, 2025 13:09
Copy link
Contributor

@MelReyCG MelReyCG left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Waiting for the last two comments to be resolved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

DO NOT MERGE ! flag: no rebaseline Does not require rebaseline type: CI Concerns github workflows or generic CI

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants