'[Scilab-Dev] codecheck() / slint() : semicolons at EOL... is not a rule.'

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

List:       scilab-dev
Subject:    [Scilab-Dev] codecheck() / slint() : semicolons at EOL... is not a rule.
From:       Samuel Gougeon <sgougeon () free ! fr>
Date:       2016-06-08 10:15:20
Message-ID: 5757F038.5020501 () free ! fr
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]

Hello,

The Scilab code checker currently proposes a coding rule according to 
which each line of code should be ended with a semicolon ";":
/"Check that lines are finished with a semicolon"./

Scilab language is not C or C++. AFAIK, there is no need for this "rule" 
in Scilab language.
So why proposing it?

A comma ",", a semicolon ";", or a EndOfLine "\n" can be used as 
instructions separator.
I would be interested in learning why there should be 2 consecutive 
instructions separators at the end of a line.

By the way, in scripts.sce, the ";" has another function (than 
separator) that is to cancel the display of the output of the last 
instruction. But the user may want to display it on purpose, and so to 
not use any semi-colon.

Unless there is a rationale to the benefit of users supporting it, IMO 
this rule should be removed from the set of defined ones, even if 
following it is not mandatory. Simply because it is not a rule /at all/, 
even for code styling.
On the opposite, avoiding every useless symbol is a part of code 
styling, in such a way that the rule could be inverted: "/Check that in 
a function no semicolons are appended to lines/".

Best regards
Samuel Gougeon

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    Hello,<br>
    <br>
    The Scilab code checker currently proposes a coding rule according
    to which each line of code should be ended with a semicolon ";": <br>
    <i>"Check that lines are finished with a semicolon".</i><br>
    <br>
    Scilab language is not C or C++. AFAIK, there is no need for this
    "rule" in Scilab language.<br>
    So why proposing it?<br>
    <br>
    A comma ",", a semicolon ";", or a EndOfLine "\n" can be used as
    instructions separator.<br>
    I would be interested in learning why there should be 2 consecutive
    instructions separators at the end of a line.<br>
    <br>
    By the way, in scripts.sce, the ";" has another function (than
    separator) that is to cancel the display of the output of the last
    instruction. But the user may want to display it on purpose, and so
    to not use any semi-colon.<br>
    <br>
    Unless there is a rationale to the benefit of users supporting it,
    IMO this rule should be removed from the set of defined ones, even
    if following it is not mandatory. Simply because it is not a rule <i>at

      all</i>, even for code styling.<br>
    On the opposite, avoiding every useless symbol is a part of code
    styling, in such a way that the rule could be inverted: "<i>Check
      that in a function no semicolons are appended to lines</i>".<br>
    <br>
    Best regards<br>
    Samuel Gougeon<br>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@lists.scilab.org
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

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