List:Internals« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Tor Didriksen Date:June 23 2009 8:40am
Subject:Re: MySql coding style: Request for clarification regarding alignment
View as plain text  
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:19:23 +0200, Konstantin Osipov  
<Kostja.Osipov@stripped> wrote:

> * Tor Didriksen <Tor.Didriksen@stripped> [09/06/22 17:23]:
>> I find the alignment guidelines a bit vague:
>>
>> "you *may* align variable declarations"
>> but
>> "Align assignments from one structure to another"
>>
>> The first one is not obligatory, but the second one is?
>>
>> What if I introduce a new member, with a longer name? Should I then
>> re-align all the other declarations/assignments as well?
>> That would make the diff bigger than it has to, harder to read, and
>> give more opportunities for merge conflicts.
>
> I agree. However, this is the style.
>
> There is another part of it that is counter to easy maintenance:
>
> Class_name::method_name(Parameter_type parameter_name,
>                         Parameter_type1 parameter_name1)
>
> (i.e. LISP-like alignment of ()  lists).
>
> When you rename a method, or class, you have to realign
> everything.
>
> But this is how the code is written and we still stick to that
> style.
>

No problem.
I was just asking for a clarification.

-- didrik

Thread
MySql coding style: Request for clarification regarding alignmentTor Didriksen22 Jun
  • Re: MySql coding style: Request for clarification regarding alignmentKonstantin Osipov22 Jun
    • Re: MySql coding style: Request for clarification regarding alignmentTor Didriksen23 Jun