Sorry, I know, coding style thread... But it's Friday and this is somewhat related to the previous thread.

Bug 525063 added a lot of lines like:

    explicit TTextAttr(bool aGetRootValue)
      : mGetRootValue(aGetRootValue)
      , mIsDefined{ false }
      , mIsRootDefined{ false }

I think I find them hard to read and ugly.

Those changes I assume were generated with clang-format / clang-format-diff using the "Mozilla" coding style, so I'd rather ask people to agree in whether we prefer that style or other in order to change that if needed.

Would people agree to use:

 , mIsRootDefined { false }

Instead of:

 , mIsRootDefined{ false }


 , mFoo { }

Instead of:

 , mFoo{}


I assume the same would be for variables, I find:

  AutoRestore<bool> restore { mFoo };

easier to read than:

  AutoRestore<bool> restore{ mFoo };

What's people's opinion on that? Would people be fine with a more general "spaces around braces" rule? I can't think of a case right now where I personally wouldn't prefer it.

Also, we should probably state that consistency is preferred (I assume we generally agree on that), so in this case braces probably weren't even needed, or everything should've switched to them.

Finally, while I'm here, regarding default member initialization, what's preferred?

  uint32_t* mFoo = nullptr;


  uint32_t* mFoo { nullptr };

I'm ambivalent, but brace syntax should cover more cases IIUC (that is, there are things that you can write with braces that you couldn't with equals I _think_).

Should we state a preference? Or just say that both are allowed but consistency is better?

 -- Emilio
dev-platform mailing list

Reply via email to