>>His indentation of opening braces is inconsistent.
>Yes, but it's clearer (to me) than
>for (;;)
>{CallFunction();}
Might be academic at this point, but for a single *statement* (not line)
following a for(), if(), while(), etc., enclosing braces are *not*
required. So
for(;;)
CallFunction();
would be sufficient. Similarly,
if( condition ) DoStuff(); else DoSomethingElse();
works fine. Only if you'd want to do something funky like
for(;;)
{ DoThis(); DoThat(); DoSomethingElseToo(); }
would that style be <coff!> "required".
Dunno, but I turn off all "automatic" indenting and indent things myself
manually. Get much more control that way for minimal extra effort...
<shrug/>
Ooh.. Quick example: Why bother with a rather ghastly
<table class='caution'>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Caution</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Coffee is hot!</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
when a much more compact
<table class='caution'>
<thead><tr><th>Caution</th></tr></thead>
<tbody><tr><td>Coffee is hot!</td></tr></tbody>
</table>
will do, *and* be more readable?
The first would be generated with automatic indenting rules, and you'd
have to expend *more* effort compacting it afterward, when you could
much more easily just forego automatic indenting and just type what you
*want* directly.
Same goes for C/javascript/perl/etc. "cliche" code snippets.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
