On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Lorn Potter <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 01/05/2013, at 2:47 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 09:01:51AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>> On segunda-feira, 29 de abril de 2013 23.30.59, André Pönitz wrote: >>>> The rules are ok as they are (pretty much as _any_ set of consistently >>>> applied and not-completely-weird rules). Opening them up only leads to >>>> more review bikeshedding. >>>> >>>> It's not that people actively change coding style in old Qt code, and >>>> there's always the "don't stick to the rules if it makes you look bad" >>>> excuse. >>> >>> Let's not try to change any of the rules, since this leads to bikeshedding, >>> like André said. It clearly has already become that. >>> >> so let's meta-bikeshed instead? >> >>> So let's just change the interpretation: the "don't stick to the rules" >>> allows >>> us to accept a slightly different style if that makes it nicer. That should >>> be >>> enough to apply to the case of braces in single-line ifs. >>> >> now, that is kinda ridiculous. the cop-out rule exists to justify >> exceptions in corner cases, not to give everyone a free pass for their >> coding style preferences. > > If I recall, it was also to give developers a little freedom in their > expression.
I had assumed it was also to prevent people wasting time on big arguments over whitespace. So long as the code isn't a hideous mess then you are permitted to focus on more important edits. Drawing it back to Thiago's question, the style guides sound close enough already that I don't think we'll get real gains by worrying about it. I feel that the cost of a few extra braces here or a few fewer braces there is less than a twenty e-mail debate, which seems to be the alternative ;) . -- Alan Alpert _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
