[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Changes I've been thinking of...

From: Gregory Casamento
Subject: Re: Changes I've been thinking of...
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 18:10:38 -0400

I'm not a huge fan of the gnu coding standards.  To me if the code is
good and makes sense the formatting is secondary.

On Friday, October 9, 2009, Matt Rice <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Quentin Mathé <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Le 9 oct. 2009 à 20:48, Matt Rice a écrit :
>>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:37 AM, Nicola Pero
>>> <address@hidden> 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
> address@hidden

Gregory Casamento
Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant
## GNUstep Chief Maintainer
yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa
(240)274-9630 (Cell), (301)362-9640 (Home)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]