On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Markus Neteler <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Vaclav Petras <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Of course I meant this script which creates exactly the strange format > I'm > > talking about. There is even no comment or waring discussing the quite > > unexpected behavior of a script which should create nice standardized > code. > > The discussion was in 2008, for some pointers, see > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/2008-April/037622.html > ... > > Applied: > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/2008-August/039200.html > > No problem to discuss again of course. > > Thanks Markus for the links. In the emails I see a lot of discussion about tab being 8 spaces wide versus some other width. And I see that 8 spaces for a tab is probably the ideal (at least it was).* However, I don't see the reasons for having first level of indent 4 spaces and second 1 tab. This means that first level of indent is 1/2 of a tab? I don't think this is a good idea. * If you are using only tabs it really does not matter "how long" tab (in spaces) is because indentation levels are defined in number of tabs (not spaces) and the number is natural number (naturally). > Markus >
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
