Re: [Chicken-users] on the note of documentation...
Graham Fawcett wrote: Does anyone have a reference to a Scheme style guide? I know I've seen one, but I can't think where. This lazy Emacs user is spoiled by built-in functionality. I've been following Riastradh's Lisp Style Rules in my code: http://mumble.net/~campbell/scheme/style.txt ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] on the note of documentation...
i was mostly referring to headers, comments, indent style, etc :) naming is a hideous can of worms that boils down to 'it depends on exactly what youre doing and why' in most cases, outside of the obvious '? for predicates, ! for modifiers' ... although some general guidelines might not be a bad idea. theres a style guide on schemers.org wiki somewhere, that i happen to disagree with on most points :) -elf On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Graham Fawcett wrote: On Feb 12, 2008 2:12 PM, Elf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and given that there will be an influx of people working on lots of stuff... what do people think about setting some style/indent rules/suggestions for code? For me, it's Emacs' (indent-sexp), with scheme-mode's adjustments for Scheme code. You could probably suggest a max-line-length, but beyond use conventional Scheme indentation I'm not sure what else you could do. Does anyone have a reference to a Scheme style guide? I know I've seen one, but I can't think where. This lazy Emacs user is spoiled by built-in functionality. On the naming of things, it would be very hard at this point in the game to enforce a prefix: naming convention across all egg procedures (as in http:GET, contrasted with the gazillion 'format' definitions). It would be helpful, iff there were also syntactic support for not requiring the prefixes when a module is imported, as mzscheme and Common Lisp do. I've worked on a module system that addresses that, as I'm sure many others have, but we have no comprehensive solution. G ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
[Chicken-users] on the note of documentation...
and given that there will be an influx of people working on lots of stuff... what do people think about setting some style/indent rules/suggestions for code? -elf ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] on the note of documentation...
On Feb 12, 2008 2:12 PM, Elf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and given that there will be an influx of people working on lots of stuff... what do people think about setting some style/indent rules/suggestions for code? For me, it's Emacs' (indent-sexp), with scheme-mode's adjustments for Scheme code. You could probably suggest a max-line-length, but beyond use conventional Scheme indentation I'm not sure what else you could do. Does anyone have a reference to a Scheme style guide? I know I've seen one, but I can't think where. This lazy Emacs user is spoiled by built-in functionality. On the naming of things, it would be very hard at this point in the game to enforce a prefix: naming convention across all egg procedures (as in http:GET, contrasted with the gazillion 'format' definitions). It would be helpful, iff there were also syntactic support for not requiring the prefixes when a module is imported, as mzscheme and Common Lisp do. I've worked on a module system that addresses that, as I'm sure many others have, but we have no comprehensive solution. G ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
