On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Quentin Mathé <qma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Le 9 oct. 2009 à 20:48, Matt Rice a écrit : > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:37 AM, Nicola Pero >> <nicola.p...@meta-innovation.com> wrote: >>>> >>> By the way the GNU coding standards are not bad, in fact I personally >>> like >>> them (mostly because >>> my eyesight is really bad and whitespace is much more effective at >>> separating tokens than >>> brackets or commas). There are some details I'd change, but they >>> certainly >>> are not an unusual >>> or weird choice for a large free software project. >> >> To me it is about separating groups of tokens, e.g. if you are going >> to separate like this >> >> [thing foo: arg1 bar: arg2]; >> >> and insist on including that space between the 'foo:arg1' group, >> the whole message send looks androgynous with parts of the selectors >> mixed in with their arguments... >> >> compared with >> [thing foo:arg1 bar:arg2]; >> >> it is very easy for me to pick out which args go with which parts of >> the selector, and >> which message is being sent... > > Well it's possible to argue in the opposite way :-) > The first version is more readable than the second, because it's very easy > to spot each 'colon + white space' combination. > Then you know the left part is a method keyword and the right part is the > argument. > In the second case, 'colons' without white space seems slower to find > because they are lost in the middle of other characters. > > The first version is also closer to the spirit of Smalltalk, in the sense > the punctuation related spacing is similar to a real sentence. > imo Smalltalk code with this spacing style is clearer than Smalltalk code > without a space between each method keyword and argument pair. > This point is less important in Objective-C given the whole language syntax > is far less clean (C syntax + brackets everywhere). But it still matters a > bit I think. I agree I'm getting really subjective here :-)
of course... each language is different in scheme (+(+ 1 2) 3) looks horrible compared to (+ (+ 1 2) 3) I'm assuming that RMS being a lisp programmer, this must be the reason why the GNU coding standards do it this way, but that doesn't make it right for objective-c. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev