> I support this too… leads to more noise in, and less readability of, the > patch. > > > > Readability of the patch is not harmed with modern tooling (with > whitespace being highlighted differently to content changes). > > > > Legibility of the code (not patch) should always be preferred IMO. To aid > code comprehension, we should aim for density of useful information for the > reader; wasting a dozen or more lines on zero information density, solely > to solve a problem already handled by modern diff tools, is a false economy. >
We are talking about one extra line, not a dozen or more. It also improves the readability of the code IMHO. > > I would also like to suggest that an operator should always carry on > line wraps > > > > For the ternary operator I agree, however I am less convinced in other > cases. String concatenation is probably cleaner with the opposite norm, so > that string literals are aligned. > IMHO it works for string concatenation too. The example that comes to mind is a) *method*( "aaaaaaaaaaaaa", "bbbbbbbbbbbbb", "ccccccccccccc" ) b) *method*( "aaaaaaaaaaaaa" + "bbbbbbbbbbbbb" + "ccccccccccccc" ) c) *method*( "aaaaaaaaaaaaa" + "bbbbbbbbbbbbb" + "ccccccccccccc" ) Once the code gets more real, it is faster to read the difference between (a) and (c) than it (a) and (b).