Coding standards: curly bracket style
-
Here we go.... :) On a more serious note, I've seen both coding styles, and I despise #2. It just makes the code harder to read - *to me*. Am I just an old fart? I read an actual flaming rant about CamelCase (this is not) vs. camelCase (camels have humps in the middle). So, I finally get that. But the curlies? jumping into fox hole now.
Charlie Gilley Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
I am like you, love style #1, just can't stand style #2.
Regards, Nish
Website: www.voidnish.com Blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
-
Here we go.... :) On a more serious note, I've seen both coding styles, and I despise #2. It just makes the code harder to read - *to me*. Am I just an old fart? I read an actual flaming rant about CamelCase (this is not) vs. camelCase (camels have humps in the middle). So, I finally get that. But the curlies? jumping into fox hole now.
Charlie Gilley Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Yeah - I hate reading 1TB because it does it's damnedest to hide the open bracket. I'm not fond of Allman either - I use Whitesmiths as it just feels more "together" to indent the brackets to the same level as the code block it's enclosing:
if (a == b)
{
c();
}Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
Here we go.... :) On a more serious note, I've seen both coding styles, and I despise #2. It just makes the code harder to read - *to me*. Am I just an old fart? I read an actual flaming rant about CamelCase (this is not) vs. camelCase (camels have humps in the middle). So, I finally get that. But the curlies? jumping into fox hole now.
Charlie Gilley Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
camELCase?
-
Yeah - I hate reading 1TB because it does it's damnedest to hide the open bracket. I'm not fond of Allman either - I use Whitesmiths as it just feels more "together" to indent the brackets to the same level as the code block it's enclosing:
if (a == b)
{
c();
}Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
``` if (a == b) { c(); } ``` UGH! I really don't like that one at all. I used to do things K&R style: ```cs if (a == b) { c(); } ``` but then I realised that that's a little bit ghastly, too. So for a long time I've been doing it this way ... ``` if (a == b) { c(); } ``` ... and getting a little bit miffed with anyone that doesn't. It really makes code flow much more visible.
-
There Are 10 Types Of Programmers[^] Mediation[^] Made me laugh! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
For me K&R. CamelCase when public members, camelCase when private.
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver When I was six, there were no ones and zeroes - only zeroes. And not all of them worked. -- Ravi Bhavnani
-
``` if (a == b) { c(); } ``` UGH! I really don't like that one at all. I used to do things K&R style: ```cs if (a == b) { c(); } ``` but then I realised that that's a little bit ghastly, too. So for a long time I've been doing it this way ... ``` if (a == b) { c(); } ``` ... and getting a little bit miffed with anyone that doesn't. It really makes code flow much more visible.
I like it because it's consistent - it's treating the indentation of the compound statement and the single statement in the same way. But it's horses for courses! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
I like it because it's consistent - it's treating the indentation of the compound statement and the single statement in the same way. But it's horses for courses! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
I can see the logic behind it and I've worked with a couple of people that have used it but I find it murder on the eyeballs. Needless to say, if that was the one that I used, I'd probably say the same about my way (i.e. the proper way :) ).
-
Here we go.... :) On a more serious note, I've seen both coding styles, and I despise #2. It just makes the code harder to read - *to me*. Am I just an old fart? I read an actual flaming rant about CamelCase (this is not) vs. camelCase (camels have humps in the middle). So, I finally get that. But the curlies? jumping into fox hole now.
Charlie Gilley Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
I'm weird. for me it depends on the language, because I let my style be dictated by the larger community choice. I suppose that means I'm either indecisive, or I don't really care one way or the other. C/C++/C# - Style 1, and I can't abide code written in style 2. Javascript - Style 2. To the point that if I see javascript written in Style 1, I don't even recognize it as valid javascript. Java? By the time I've reached my first curly, I've already written too much Java, so I just delete the project and start over in a better language. :-\
-
If a standard is a standard, it should be enforced as such, otherwise, it is just a suggestion. That being said, each organization needs to determine what they consider to be a standard. At one of my previous employs, the 'standard' was to have the file name match the routine name, and since the overarching standard was 9 character file names, we ended up with routine names like: SRVEXTPSM and SRVEXTSSM. When I objected because I had no idea what the routine was supposed to do, I was told it was following the naming standard as though that was an explanation in itself.
In the absence of an established corporate coding standard, when editing an existing file, you should always adapt the style already used in the file. When creating a new file, you are free to go your own way, but consideration should be given to maintaining the same style as the other files in the folder (if there is a dominant style). When I'm at home, I use the first style. At work, I'm lucky enough to working on my own stuff, so my preferred style is in force there as well.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
There Are 10 Types Of Programmers[^] Mediation[^] Made me laugh! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
BEFORE - for C# style and NOW - Java.
-
In the absence of an established corporate coding standard, when editing an existing file, you should always adapt the style already used in the file. When creating a new file, you are free to go your own way, but consideration should be given to maintaining the same style as the other files in the folder (if there is a dominant style). When I'm at home, I use the first style. At work, I'm lucky enough to working on my own stuff, so my preferred style is in force there as well.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
In the absence of an established corporate coding standard, when editing an existing file, you should always adapt the style already used in the file.
Generally speaking, yes, and I'd never consider reformatting someone's code because they use a different style but I must confess that when I come across a really badly formatted SQL script - all random indents and inconsistent capitilisation combined with rubbish aliases and so forth - I just can't stop myself from tidying it up. It's a little ironic in that I can't remember when I last tidied my desk (or my house for that matter) but messy code annoys the living daylights out of me.
-
I'm weird. for me it depends on the language, because I let my style be dictated by the larger community choice. I suppose that means I'm either indecisive, or I don't really care one way or the other. C/C++/C# - Style 1, and I can't abide code written in style 2. Javascript - Style 2. To the point that if I see javascript written in Style 1, I don't even recognize it as valid javascript. Java? By the time I've reached my first curly, I've already written too much Java, so I just delete the project and start over in a better language. :-\
Vark111 wrote:
Javascript - Style 2. To the point that if I see javascript written in Style 1, I don't even recognize it as valid javascript.
Good call. The javascript engine's semicolon injector behaves in ways that make it clear it doesn't regard opening braces on the next line as valid js either. It will "helpfully" turn this:
//I want to do stuff 10 times
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
DoStuff()
}... into this:
//I want to do stuff 10 times
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++); //Javascript engines thoughts: Do nothing loop. This makes no sense unless the programer is an idiot, but he wrote javascript so that's a reasonable assumption.
{
DoStuff(); //Javascript engines thoughts: not part of a loop body, will execute only once
}:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
I'm weird. for me it depends on the language, because I let my style be dictated by the larger community choice. I suppose that means I'm either indecisive, or I don't really care one way or the other. C/C++/C# - Style 1, and I can't abide code written in style 2. Javascript - Style 2. To the point that if I see javascript written in Style 1, I don't even recognize it as valid javascript. Java? By the time I've reached my first curly, I've already written too much Java, so I just delete the project and start over in a better language. :-\
Interesting, since I don't recognize javascript as a valid language. (My "favorite" part about Python: scratching your head why something is failing only to realize that one line is indented using spaces and the next tabs.)
-
Yeah - I hate reading 1TB because it does it's damnedest to hide the open bracket. I'm not fond of Allman either - I use Whitesmiths as it just feels more "together" to indent the brackets to the same level as the code block it's enclosing:
if (a == b)
{
c();
}Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
I guess it depends on whether you consider the brackets part of the enclosing code block or the enclosed code block.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Vark111 wrote:
Javascript - Style 2. To the point that if I see javascript written in Style 1, I don't even recognize it as valid javascript.
Good call. The javascript engine's semicolon injector behaves in ways that make it clear it doesn't regard opening braces on the next line as valid js either. It will "helpfully" turn this:
//I want to do stuff 10 times
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
DoStuff()
}... into this:
//I want to do stuff 10 times
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++); //Javascript engines thoughts: Do nothing loop. This makes no sense unless the programer is an idiot, but he wrote javascript so that's a reasonable assumption.
{
DoStuff(); //Javascript engines thoughts: not part of a loop body, will execute only once
}:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
Dan Neely wrote:
The javascript engine's semicolon injector behaves in ways that make it clear it doesn't regard opening braces on the next line as valid js either.
Yeah, I really wish there was a way to turn off ASI in my js files (like a 'use strict' kind of thing).
-
There Are 10 Types Of Programmers[^] Mediation[^] Made me laugh! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
Well - when it comes right down to it,
struct doneRight Melody_Crawford_Cleaned_Up_Their_Mess() {
"Their indents sucked";
} // struct doneRight Melody_Crawford_Cleaned_Up_Their_Mess()
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Here we go.... :) On a more serious note, I've seen both coding styles, and I despise #2. It just makes the code harder to read - *to me*. Am I just an old fart? I read an actual flaming rant about CamelCase (this is not) vs. camelCase (camels have humps in the middle). So, I finally get that. But the curlies? jumping into fox hole now.
Charlie Gilley Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
I think on the one of the Microsoft Guide lines for Capitalisation they call it PascalCasing instead of CamelCasing and then use camelCase also.
-
...weepy widdle Richard :laugh:
-
There Are 10 Types Of Programmers[^] Mediation[^] Made me laugh! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
My 2¢: I was a devotee of K&R braces (the second style) for a long time. When I started programming in C#, I switched to Allman[^] braces (the first style). I've grown to prefer Allman to an extent such that I've written a VS editor macro to reformat K&R braces to Allman. I don't use the built-in VS reformatting; they screw up too many other things.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
In the absence of an established corporate coding standard, when editing an existing file, you should always adapt the style already used in the file. When creating a new file, you are free to go your own way, but consideration should be given to maintaining the same style as the other files in the folder (if there is a dominant style). When I'm at home, I use the first style. At work, I'm lucky enough to working on my own stuff, so my preferred style is in force there as well.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013During my first year as a CompSci student, I got hold of a 'large' program: The 'Open Source' Pascal compiler, written in itself (yes, open source did exist before Linux! What Linux did was introducing the term) from ETH. In those days, a Pascal program couldn't be broken into modules: Everything had to be put into a single source file, even if it was a 20-30 kloc compiler. This compiler source code was very consistent in the coding style of the tokenizer and parser. It was also very consistent in the semantic analysis. And it was highly consistent in the code generating functions. Three quite different, but very consistent coding styles, within a single source file. Even today I am surprised that they managed to keep it that way, without messing up each other's coding style. (I assume that there must have been three guys resposible for one part each.)
