Message-ID:	<38EBEA6D.D1E0E8BD@home.com>
From:	Robin Johnson <robbat2 AT home DOT com>
Organization:	Orbit Computers
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en,af,es
MIME-Version:	1.0
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Bracketing: A Matter of Style
X-Priority:	2 (High)
References:	<38EBD03D DOT 895D1680 AT mindspring DOT com>
Lines:	78
Date:	Thu, 06 Apr 2000 01:37:41 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	24.113.36.103
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT home DOT net
X-Trace:	news1.rdc1.bc.home.com 954985061 24.113.36.103 (Wed, 05 Apr 2000 18:37:41 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Wed, 05 Apr 2000 18:37:41 PDT
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> That seems to me to be the most logical way to do it, for a variety of
> reasons:

> 1) The function is clearly visible, instead of being obscured, because
> it is the only thing on the far left.  This may seem trivial, but it
> makes it much easier to skim through code looking for a particular
> function.
Use the search function, or failing that, use grep.

> 2) All the contents of the function (or loop or whatever) line up, so
> that it is easy to tell what is contained in what.
The human brain is capable of recognizing complex patterns at a glance.

> 3) It is easy to tell which brackets are unpaired (for those lazy folks
> who always forget to close them), because the start and end brackets
> line up.
Hmm, doesn't your code editor have an option to highlight matching brackets?
RHIDE does have the option for it.

> 4) The white space helps separate chunks of code and thus make them
> easier to understand at a glance.
I agree with this point to a degree, but it is also worth noting that 
excessive whitespace restricts the overview of the function, if it is larger.

> 5) Aesthetically speaking, it produces clearer, better-looking code
> (imho).
YMMV with what each person thinks look better.

> I realize that most coders are almost religiously against this
> bracketing system, and cling instead to the trendier style exemplified
> thusly:
We like to party just as much as the next guy, and have fun in our work.

> int main(void) {
>     printf("Hello, World!");
>     return 0;
>     }
> 
  int main(void);
&
  int main(void)
  {
   return(0);
  }
can look similar at a quick glance, because the semicolon and the curly 
brackets can be missed, and whitespace seen there instead.

You might also want to take a look at the program called indent. It is 
available in the /gnu subdir on simtel. It will neatly format any code, 
however you want. For example, when I am doing some coding, and repeatedly 
working with modifying a particular function, by the end of the modifications, 
it will be quite mangled. So then just run it through indent, with your own 
settings, and it will look quite a bit better.

It is also important to notice that things line up quite a bit more in our
styles as well
take for example:

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { 
	  for(int i=0;i<10;i++)
	    printf("%i\n\r",i);
	  return(0);
	}

> This appears much more awkward, and it accomplishes little.  The coders
> are saving a single line of whitespace, while losing the aforementioned
> benefits of the "lined-up" bracketing style.
It still has the "lined-up" style that you mention, just on a different level 
than you expect.
 
-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
"Robbat2"
QTOD: "I used to be an idealist, but I got mugged by reality."
E-Mail     : robbat2 AT tesla DOT t-p-l DOT com
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
Home Page  : http://robbat2.t-p-l.com
Time Zone  : Pacific Daylight (GMT - 8)

- Raw text -