So far I have not heard any strong objections to using http://geosoft.no/development/cppstyle.html as a style guide.
Two people have raised 4 space indenting and I'm inclined to agree. In the interests of avoiding endless debate on personal preference I propose we just live with it as-is with only those 2 exceptions: 4 space indents and .cpp file extensions. Making a long list of exceptions kinda defeats the purpose of picking a ready made style guide. If you _really_ hate it (and you actually plan to write some C++ code for qpid) propose an alternative ready-made, well-documented guide that suits your taste and we can vote on it. Or just use rules 1. and 2. extensively :) Cheers, Alan. Thu, 2006-10-26 at 10:04 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote: > Alan Conway wrote: > > With thanks to Kim for finding it, I'd like to propose > > > > http://geosoft.no/development/cppstyle.html > > > > As the style guide for QPID C++ with the exception that Qpid continue to > > use the .cpp file extension rather than .c++ It's not too far off the > > existing style and it's largely in agreement with styles I've seen used > > on other projects. > > > > Any objections? > > I don't like point 11 at all. The scope of a variable should be obvious > without mangling the name. Leading or trailing underscores increase > noise in my opinion and reduce readability. > > I also don't like 75 (& 81 which is more or less the same thing). The > rationale seems weak to me and it reduces readability (in my opinion). > > I will be considering invoking points 1 & 2 in these cases! > > Perhaps I have bad eyesight, but I also much prefer 4 spaces of > indentation. Maybe that is why 80 chars per line often seems to narrow!
