Guidance on whether to add space between SV keyword 'wait' and parenthesis

[sriyerg]

Our current style guide does not appear to have a recommendation for whether we should add a space after wait and the opening parenthesis. It will be useful to settle on one so that Verible knows what to do.

Reason for adding space between wait and parenthesis:

• By following the Spaces around Keywords rule, the current rule set is simple - there is no need for exceptions

Reason for not adding space:

• It's an event control statement that behaves very much like a task, so it naturally aligns better with Function and Task Calls rule.
• Our current code base currently follows this style, so less churn

Interestingly, the LRM also has a mixed usage of both styles. Though, it is of course not the best place to look for style recommendations.

Thanks Sri

[matutem]

I think the current guidelines give a clear recommendation: https://github.com/lowRISC/style-guides/blob/master/VerilogCodingStyle.md#space-around-keywords recommends adding a space. Simple guidelines are easier to adopt, and with an auto-formatter these issues stop being a concern.

[asb]

Just as a point of comparison, I think most C++ codebases treat function-like keywords (alignof, decltype, sizeof, const_cast, ..., etc) differently to for and while, and don't have a spae after the keyword. Although this isn't an explicitly stated rule (unless I missed it), you can see this in the examples throughout the Google C++ styleguide.

[rswarbrick]

Personally, I'm with @matutem. Note that the full syntax for a wait statement is something like this: wait (foo) bar;. Using wait (foo); is just a degenerate case (equivalent to doing something like while (foo()); instead of while (foo()) {} in C). When you look at it like that, the construct looks a lot like an if statement (if (foo) bar;), so should "obviously" have the spaces.

There's also the wait fork; syntax, which doesn't have the parens.

My preference: Keep the existing recommendation.