On Tuesday 2017-08-29 18:32 -0700, Eric Rahm wrote: > Do we explicitly state a preferred alignment of arguments in multi-line > function declarations (primarily in the context of C++) [1]? This question > has come up in regards to using clang-format for cleaning up code [2] and > it would be helpful to be able to reference a concrete example in the style > guide. > > Given this example: > > int > Foo(const nsACstring& aStr, > mozilla::UniquePtr<const char*>&& aBuffer, > nsISupports* aOptionalThing = nullptr); > > Should the reformatted style: > > a) *stay the same* > b) align the argument names like so: > > int > Foo(const nsACstring& aStr, > mozilla::UniquePtr<const char*>&& aBuffer, > nsISupports* aOptionalThing = nullptr); > > c) some other option
I don't know if we've had any official statements, but I tend to reformat code *away* from option (b) towards your original example if I'm modifying it and need to add a parameter than would throw things out of alignment. I think I do this because (b) has the disadvantage that more code changes require touching additional lines, which is both changes blame and is extra work (although it's not extra work if we're using clang-format tree-wide). Option (b) is also more likely to lead to overly long lines that require wrapping. -David -- 𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂 𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂 Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
