[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Naming conventions?
From:       Jason Keirstead <jason () keirstead ! org>
Date:       2004-10-14 12:37:48
Message-ID: 200410140937.48369.jason () keirstead ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On October 13, 2004 08:19 pm, Michael Pyne wrote:
> What about stuff like (you'll need a fixed-width font for this
> demonstration):
>
> Namespace::type ClassWithALongName::fooMethod(bool argument_1,
>                                               int argument_2, etc...
>
>     ^        ^         ^          ^
>
> How are you going to indent the int so that it is (always, no matter what
> tab setting you use) directly under bool by using tabs alone? 

Well for one, I personally hate that indentation style, so it is a non issue.

I do not like the second line of arguments to align like that. And here is 
why: If the combination of the class name and method name approaches your 
word wrap limit, you end up with crap like this, which is just retarded:

Namespace::type ClassWithALongName::fooMethodWithLongName(bool argument_1,
                                                                                                    
bool argument_2,
                                                                                                   
QString argument_3 )

( I dont know how this is going to appear, but basically, every argument is on 
it's own line )

IMO this is *MUCH* cleaner:

Namespace::type ClassWithALongName::fooMethodWithLongName(
	bool argument_1, bool argument_2, QString argument_3
)

> Even if you are a tabs kind of programmer, this has to be done using spaces 
to look right. 

Only if "look right" == "spans many vertical lines"

-- 
There are two major products that came out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
We do not believe this to be a coincidence.  ~Jeremy S. Anderson
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]