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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Concerning automated astyle application to the code
From:       Thomas Zander <zander () kde ! org>
Date:       2010-01-18 8:10:35
Message-ID: 201001180910.35568.zander () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 18. January 2010 07.57.09 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Sunday 17 January 2010, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > On Sunday 17. January 2010 21.53.16 Dmitry Kazakov wrote:
> > > Another issue.
> >
> > Heh, didn't see a coding style debate for some time :D.  But, really,
> > everyone has an opinion and everyone has very good reasons for their
> > preference. Its the mother of all bikesheds.
> > Some years ago a coding style was chosen by Qt, later adopted by KDELibs
> > and even later by KOffice. The style was never changed from the original
> > suggested one.
> >
> > The huge advantage is consistency. You can read code much faster if it is
> > in a coding style you use too.
> > So it takes some getting used too (hell, it took me ages!) but its worth
> > it. Consistently formatted code is just a joy to read.
> >
> > And, yes, you get used to details like the ones you posted, and you get
> > faster in reading code that already is formatted like astyle now
> > produces. Which is the majority of public Qt code you'll encounter. ;)
> 
> Well, we did find some bugs in astyle recently, for instance where it would
> change
> 
> c = a * b;
> 
> to
> 
> c = a *b;
> 
> I can't imagine that that is the Qt house style.

Bugs are naturally a different thing, I hope it was clear I was not talking 
about bugs :) There is lots of 'prior art' to compare to if in doubt.

-- 
Thomas Zander
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]