Unexpected indendation is reporting non-existent issues (Android project)

[autonomousapps]

Lint error > src/main/java/com/MyClass.kt:24:9: Unexpected indentation (expected 4, actual 8)

// Class names obfuscated
class MyClass internal constructor(
        private val sharedPreferences: SharedPreferences // there are 8 spaces here
) : IMyClass {

The 8 spaces are required for continuation indents by the Android Kotlin Style Guide.

[shyiko]

@autonomousapps see pinterest/ktlint#134 (comment)

[autonomousapps]

Cool. I'll update my IDE settings to reflect this and awaaaay I go. Thanks!

[autonomousapps]

Although, I will note that I tried this, and it accomplished nothing:

kotlinter {
    indentSize = 4
    continuationIndentSize = 8
}

Am I doing it wrong? :)

[jeremymailen]

Thanks for the help-out @shyiko

@autonomousapps I'll look into it. The expectation was that continuationIndentSize ought to have been applicable to the parameter list indent, correct?

[shyiko]

Parameters use single indent per
https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/coding-conventions.html#class-header-formatting and
android/kotlin-guides#42 (not yet merged in gh-pages).

[autonomousapps]

Now it's yelling at me about another indentation issue.

Lint error > src/main/java/com/login/LoginViewModel.kt:34:1: Unexpected indentation (12) (it should be 16)

    fun onLoginRequested(credentials: LoginCredentials) {
        loginManager.login(credentials)
            .disposeOnCleared() // 12 spaces indentation
            .observeOn(mainThread)
            .subscribe({
                Logger.i(TAG, "Successful login. loginData = $it")
                loginState.value = true
            }, { t ->
                Logger.e(TAG, t, "Error logging in: ${t.localizedMessage}")
                // TODO tell view about errors
                loginState.value = false
            })
    }

[autonomousapps]

I can't control continuation indents for constructors and method calls independently. So if I set my IDE to use 4, it uses 4 everywhere. SIGH.

[jeremymailen]

Thanks for the info. That is interesting that the style guide special cases class (primary) constructor parameters as regular indents but continuation indents for secondary constructors and function calls.

I get their rationale, but IntelliJ's Kotlin formatter treats the primary constructor parameters as continuation indent. I wonder if someone ought to file a bug against JetBrains since they aren't in internal agreement.

[jeremymailen]

And I've also noticed that kotlinter's default continuationIndentSize of 8 is out of date with the new standard. I'll change it and push a new release.

Now that the default will be 4 and 4 I guess the discrepancy with IntelliJ will not be troublesome.

[jeremymailen]

On your latest code example, (onLoginRequested()) it's pointing out that you should have the continuation indent of 8 there instead of the 4 extra you have. I'm assuming you still have continuationIndentSize = 8 in that case.

[jeremymailen]

@autonomousapps let me know if there's anything else I can do to help. Otherwise can we resolve the issue?

[MyDogTom]

@autonomousapps Please take a look at my setup for Kotlin plugin. Pay attention that "use continuation indent" is checked only for: "Method call arguments", "Chained method calls" and "expression body functions".
@jeremymailen continuation indent for android is still 8, not 4. (source)

[autonomousapps]

@jeremymailen actually, I had removed the kotlinter {} block, so it was using the default of 8 for continuationIndentSize. However, if I put the block back and specify that it should be 4, then I get a successful build. Of course, this is contrary to the current advice in the style guide, which I think still specifies 8 spaces for continuation indents (unless they're primary constructor params?!).

The issue seems to be that IntelliJ doesn't let me specify those two cases individually. But frankly, I am ok with using a continuation indent of 4. The value of the tool outweighs such minor concerns. (oh whoops, I'm wrong about this)

PS @MyDogTom thanks for that advice! I'll consider doing that, instead.

Now that I have two options two deal with this, I fully consider the issue resolved. Thanks, everyone!