On 01/06/2016 18:12, Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > Yes, when it comes to initializer lists the trailing comma looks ugly to > me. Because of the inconsistent two-space indent for the first > initializer. Because line starts of are not aligned.
In my projects I use this style: MyObject::MyObject(): SuperClass(), m_var1(), m_var2() { } Having a diff taking two lines never annoyed me, especially given that often the last member is either d_ptr() or q_ptr(), so I usually add members in the middle. > Not mentioned yet: Conditional compilation vs. stable ABI: > > MamanBar::MamanBar(...) > : m_field1(...), > m_field2(...), // oh... > #ifdef FEATURE1_ENABLED > m_field3(...), // ...ah > #endif > #ifdef FEATURE2_ENABLED > m_field4(...) > #endif > { > } You can always find cases which break with either style. MamanBar::MamanBar(...) #ifdef FEATURE1_ENABLED : m_field1(...) // ...ah #endif , m_field2(...) , m_field3(...) { } Ultimately, it's just a matter of personal preferences; people like to argue about diff size or better spotting of obvious mistakes (when putting operators at the beginning of the line), while as a matter of fact people can live perfectly well and be equally productive with either style. Ciao, Alberto _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development