XML needs 2 spaces more than anything!
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Jim Grandy wrote: > Perhaps that argues for 2 spaces for .js/.lzs/.as files and 4 spaces > for .lzx files... > > On Jul 28, 2006, at 4:49 AM, P T Withington wrote: > > > Yes, I have the design whitespace issue fairly well beaten into me by > > Neil. > > > > But is it true you can never have too much whitespace? Why do we use > > only 4 spaces? Why not 8, or 80? I can see that 1 is not visually > > distinct, but in a fixed width font, 2 seems enough. And if we > > enforce 80 cols, 4 can start to seem wasteful. There are deeply > > nested blocks in the LFC where the lines get _very_ short because of > > the 4-space indent. > > > > Now that we are moving to class declarations, your function body > > starts out with 2 levels of indentation, add a little control flow, > > and before you know it, you have less than 50 chars left on your > > line... > > > > On 2006-07-28, at 00:33 EDT, Sarah Allen wrote: > > > >> my $.02... > >> > >> I like 4 spaces, but maybe that's just because Adam insisted upon > >> in at the beginning of time and I've just gotten used to it. > >> Besides whitespace is nice, not wasteful -- ask any designer you > >> know. > >> > >> I'm also for 80col -- I like having room for two pages side by side > >> on my wide screen. > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 11:09 AM, Daniel Salama wrote: > >> > >>> I use Emacs to develop Laszlo apps and really like the automatic > >>> indentation I get when using nxml mode. I like the fact that line > >>> breaks are aligned after the tag name so all beginning attributes > >>> are aligned and that's usually after the 2nd column since tag > >>> names are themselves longer than 2 columns. > >>> > >>> I think 4 spaces is wasteful. I like 2 spaces. I also would like > >>> to limit page width to, at most, 80 cols. I don't care about the > >>> 1280. There is still a very large hacker community that sticks to > >>> the 80 cols because of compatibility across systems and editors. > >>> > >>> Just my 2 cents :) > >>> > >>> - Daniel > >>> > >>> On Jul 25, 2006, at 1:50 PM, P T Withington wrote: > >>> > >>>> Scott, please explain yourself. 4 seems wasteful. > >>>> > >>>> Long lines are considered harmful, no matter how wide your average > >>>> screen. Have you read the Times lately? > >>>> > >>>> On 2006-07-25, at 13:36 EDT, Benjamin Shine wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 4! 4! 4! > >>>>> Which I only say after having Scott slap me around repeatedly for > >>>>> doing it wrong. > >>>>> I used to be into 3, myself. > >>>>> While we're at it, DARE WE come up with a line length recommended > >>>>> limit? Pablo uses > >>>>> 80 and maybe you hardcore oldskoolers do, but please, have you > >>>>> seen > >>>>> the size of the standard screen lately? Show me a coder who > >>>>> doesn't > >>>>> have at least 1280 across and I'll show you... um. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Jul 25, 2006, at 7:05 AM, P T Withington wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> After the 'grand class conversion', Phil and I plan to re- > >>>>>> indent the > >>>>>> LFC sources. [Right now Phil is making the conversion trying to > >>>>>> minimize the whitespace changes to make it easy to review. > >>>>>> Once we > >>>>>> have tested and verified that it all works, we plan to re- > >>>>>> indent.] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Looking over the LFC sources, we have some code that is > >>>>>> indented with > >>>>>> 4 spaces and some with 2. Do we care? My personal preference > >>>>>> is 2 > >>>>>> -- it's enough to be visually distinct without being wasteful. > >>>>>> But most of the sources (and apparently most editors) default to > >>>>>> 4. We > >>>>>> have a change to make things uniform. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Vote your choice today! > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> Laszlo-dev mailing list > >>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev > >>>>> > >>>>> benjamin shine > >>>>> software engineer > >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Laszlo-dev mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Laszlo-dev mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Laszlo-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Laszlo-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev > _______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
