Attention is currently required from: Martin Roth, Julius Werner, HAOUAS Elyes. Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/51553 )
Change subject: Documentation/coding_style: Add more details on include-ordering ......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
Patchset:
PS1:
As commented elsewhere, manual alphabetical ordering creates a […]
Sorry, just read a comment on CB:50247 that I missed earlier.
So, what I understand so far is that it would make it easier to manually search for an existing include (and would avoid duplicates, I imply).
IMHO, that's not enough to justify to encourage alphabetical order. As there are no guarantees that it really is ordered even if it looks like, one should just let their text editor search for it. In my experience that's even faster.
I can't provide any reasonable statistics, but in my own per- ception it seems that over the years the use of alphabetical order has increased which brought a huge amount of noise around it (comments to introduce / keep alphabetical order, fixups to re-introduce it, duplicate entries because alphabe- tical order was assumed but actually not the case).
I guess there are only two ways to fix it: Introduce tooling that checks the alphabetical order or discourage it. Any written statement that encourages it without any enforce- ment just makes the situation worse.