On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 06:42:24PM +1000, Scott Smedley wrote:
> > > * Please put single statements in loops or if clauses in curly
> > > braces, i.e.
> > >
> > > if (1)
> > > {
> > > foo;
> > > }
> > >
> > > not
> > >
> > > if (1)
> > > foo;
> >
> > What's the rationale behind this? I must confess I'm not particularly fond
> > of this restriction but I will, of course, follow any FVWM coding standards.
Maintenance. It is easy to forget to add the curly braces when
you add another statement to a branch, at least if your editor
does not automatically indent the code. There's not much else
behind it.
> >From docs/CONVENTIONS:
>
> o Always place curly braces on a separate line. In some cases,
> placing braces on the same line as other code confuses
> (x)emacs.
>
> Wouldn't it be prudent to fix Emacs?
The question is: who is going to do it? I don't know how to fix
it. One case in which xemacs misbehaves is when you have such a
function:
void foo(void) {
...
}
If you press C-x 4 a to generate a ChangeLog entry, it does not
find the function's name. That does not affect code inside the
functions. Personally
* I don't like braces on a code line because I have difficulties
to find the matching closing brace if it's not in the same
column.
* I don't care much about code in places I rarely look at, but if
I see such code in the files I maintain most of the time (most
of the fvwm core), I reformat it.
> (That's an honest question, not trying to start an xemacs-vs-gvim war.)
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpZ6tDOfHnoh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
