On Sunday, 13 July 2014 at 17:24:40 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/13/2014 06:45 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Wrong. There are things which are simply bad ideas.
E.g. in this case, "Egyptian"-style braces definitely make
your code
more compact,
I.e. you see where everything is.
Yes, the same argument for books and slides is also applicable to
all other media. This style has also caught on amongst the other
curly braced languages that I use, so that most of the code I
read (and write) has adopted it (C/C++/Java/Javascript code, that
is). The Phobos style is incredibly wasteful IMO, but that's what
D has adopted, so if you intend to contribute to Phobos, you had
better get used to it.
The Rust community appears to have made the right choice with
Egyptian for everything.
but separate-line opening braces definitely make it easier
to see where scopes begin and end.
All of this is subjective, of course, but I definitely don't find
that the Phobos style provides this advantage.
This is the only argument I have heard in favour of doing this,
but it is not actually valid. This critique might apply to Lisp
style.
Not sure I follow you here. Most of the Lisp I've read is
indented like Python, the idea being that you learn not to not
see all of the parens and rely on tools like paredit to do the
trivial balancing. I'd hate to read Lisp with separate lines for
parens that open scopes. I'm sure that's not what you mean!
