Feature request: bulloak.toml config file

[PaulRBerg]

Things that I would like to configure (and which Bulloak would apply to all Solidity code generated via scaffold):

• Indenting (4 spaces instead of 2): Four spaces for indenting level #40

• SPDX license

• compiler pragma as a string (e.g., >=0.8.19)

• GPT processing: Feature request: GPT integration to shorten function and modifier names #39

• Whether I want a bespoke name for the final leaf (ref Feature request: special naming for the final leaf test #37)

• Whether I want one-test-per-it-branch or bundled-its (ref General feedback #7 (comment))
  General feedback #7 (reply in thread))
  Potentially helpful for other users:

• Case sensitivity (ref feature request: case-insensitivity OR control over output comment style #20)

It would be nice if these settings could be kept in foundry.toml somehow, but I don't think Foundry allows custom configs.

I'm sure @mds1 and future users will find other use cases with this config file.

[mds1]

I'd suggest requiring the config to just live in foundry.toml to avoid needing new config files for each tool. See foundry-rs/foundry#5866 for my suggestion on how this would look

[alexfertel]

Tbh, I have conflicting feelings over this one. I totally agree with having a config file. However, if the only advantage of having the config inside foundry.toml is having one less file in the project, I'd rather use a separate bulloak.toml. I know people have hated having way-too-many config files historically, but I don't really mind it.

The rationale for a separate bulloak.toml is:

• Friendlier for first-time users:
  • Someone who hasn't used bulloak before would not expect it to be configured in a foundry.toml.
  • Syntax is a bit more complex. Users need to be aware of the proposed external (or whatever is chosen) and the config will be surrounded by unrelated configs.
• Parsing is simpler. A trivial amount, but nonetheless simpler.
• Stay decoupled from Foundry. This is not a strong argument, bulloak is already coupled to Foundry, however, that might change in the future.
• Generating a file with the default config is simpler that modifying a foundry.toml.

That being said, I'm not strongly opinionated.

[PaulRBerg]

I know people have hated having way-too-many config files historically, but I don't really mind it.

Me neither!

bulloak is already coupled to Foundry, however, that might change in the future.

TBH I can see Bulloak used for other blockchain programming languages + paradigms other than crypto.

The rationale for a separate bulloak.toml

Agree with all points