When proposing RT-style-marks i meant not only indentation, but names, style of modularisation and such too. Start with Carls scripts as typical and mark such which are styled similar. Its not meant to be a dogma, but to get a "typical use". So if i where in doubt about zipzap: func[str][] zipzap: func[str[string!]][] i could read some RT-style-examples and see in wich cases Carl adds argument-types. or how he does error-handling. or something.
I think everyone can have its own style. But peoples searching style should learn it from RT-examples first. and have some help to decide "is it RT or not?" so the flag. -Volker Am Dienstag, 11. November 2003 18:41 schrieb Ladislav Mecir: > Hi Andrew, > > >Volker wrote (in another thread): > >>Hmm, eventually rebol.org could mark RT-style-scripts so people can > > > >look up "official" examples when in doubt? > > > >Perhaps this could be a declaration in the header? For example: > > Style: 'Rebol-Official > > > >People who prefer different styles could then propose different style > >standards which they think might be better or just different, like: > > Style: 'Cobol-Like > > Style: 'Natural > > Style: none > > Style: Andrew ; :) > > > >After all, with out variation in style, how can it improve? > > > >What do people think? > > Sorry, I don't like this idea. > > -L -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
