On Jan 30, 2008 3:01 AM, Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > What is GnuCash's preferred format for adding multi-line comments within > the > > code of a C function? > > AFAIK there still isn't a preferred format for the whole project. > There was a long indentation discussion including comment format at > http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/2007-March/020099.html . > At > the time the discussion ended with some sort of consensus but without > any action to actually implement that consensus. I read through the thread. I looks like what was proposed was style 1. (By the way, I'm with you and Josh as far as braces are concerned... I prefer -bli0 and I find -br incredibly hard to read.) > Hence, we're back to > the status quo which is "stick to the style that already exists in the > file" but apart from that you can do whatever you prefer. > > As for your actual proposals: > Just to be clear, I'm not proposing anything... this is just a list of styles that I saw in the existing GnuCash code, and I'm trying to find out which style is preferred. > > --- Style 1 --- > > /* comment line 1 > > * comment line 2 */ > > > > --- Style 2 --- > > /* comment line 1 > > comment line 2 */ > > > > --- Style 3 --- > > /* comment line 1 */ > > /* comment line 2 */ > > > > --- Style 4 --- > > /* comment line 1 > > * comment line 2 > > */ > > > > --- Style 5 --- > > /* > > * comment line 1 > > * comment line 2 > > */ > > > > --- Style 6 --- > > // comment line 1 > > // comment line 2 > > > > My personal preference has always been style 6, > > Although my personal preference would be style 6, too, some older > compilers would still barf on those C++ / C99 comments. However, I'm > also not sure whether it is of any value to be considerate of non-C99 > compilers (i.e. C89) as I think we have plenty of C99 constructs > already in the code. > There are already C++/C99 comments in GnuCash (engine/Transaction.c for example) so maybe these work OK... I guess unless someone says otherwise, I'll use style 6. If consistency is the issue, well, the file I'm working on is already quite inconsistent - for those places that have comments at all! If I can use style 6, then I have no problem quickly going through the entire file that I'm working on and making it use this style consistently (gotta love vi). -Charles Definitely avoided should be style 3, and maybe to a lesser extent style 1. > > Regards, > > Christian > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
