On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 09:23:09PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> Just noticed some random things about code
>
> 1) Some returns at the end of void functions have been removed.
>
> These are actually there to improve code quality: I _always_ put
> a return at the end of a function. That way, when I come across
> a function that I've written that does not have a return at the
> end, I know its broken or unfinished.
I don't mind either way, but it's certainly not something I do by
default, I'd have to actively remember to do so.
> 2) Indentation with tabs everywhere.
>
> Great.
>
> 3) Indentation of variables, e.g.:
>
> int x;
> int y;
> Bool fWasAlreadyPopped = False;
>
> Can this please be reverted? Lining up variable names *always*
> leads to bloated patches in the future because lines that have not
> been changed need to be reindented if a new variable has a longer
> type, and its useless anyway.
So this was the result of me running indent(1) over everthing. I could
see a large amount of inconsistency across the code with respect to any
one style, and wasn't sure which was even meant to be used. In my own
bias, I'm a BSD person and hence indent(1) naturally gave a style close
to that.
It's not something I'm that bothered by, as long as whatever we use is
consistent.
> 4) Indentation of wrapped function declarations.
>
> I don't understand the logic behing this, and I don't have an
> xemacs style that could do this properly.
It's supposed to be four spaces when a declaration wraps onto the next
line. Again, this came from indent(1).
You'll find all sorts of subtle changes like this, Dominik, I suspect,
where my one buck-shot approach has butchered the files across the
repository.
-- Thomas Adam
--
"Deep in my heart I wish I was wrong. But deep in my heart I know I am
not." -- Morrissey ("Girl Least Likely To" -- off of Viva Hate.)
