Alexander Terekhov schrieb:
> You made my day today, GNUtian Bader.
> Miles Bader wrote:
> > "silversurfer2025" <kietzi@xxxxxx> writes:
> > >> so how do I change the code to not put brackets of functions into
> > >> the next line?
> > ...
> > > OK, maybe I'll have to change myself instead of changing the standards
> > > which exist.. I just liked my way of writing it better, but this might
> > > only be habituation..
> > Maybe I should know better than to comment on coding style issues but:
> > I find that although I can adjust to almost any of the common C / C++
> > coding conventions (though of course I have my preferences), the
> > "function-beginning-brace not at the start of line" is one of the hardest
> > to deal with; I find it simply makes code very hard to read.
> > As far as I can tell this is because my brain uses a similar strategy to
> > Emacs for locating function boundaries: I quickly scan looking for the
> > function-beginning-brace, and go from there. Braces at the beginning of
> > the line are unsually easy to see, as they are isolated on a line, are in a
> > fixed position, and are surounded by whitespace; braces at the end of a
> > line are not -- they blend, they become just another bit of puncuation.
> > For most control constructs, this "blending" is OK, your brain is probably
> > relying mostly on indentation to follow control structure anyway. But I
> > think the beginning of the function is a more critical synchronization
> > point, and needs to be more strongly demarcated.
What is this supposed to mean? You also use the brackets behind the
mothod name... Is there something else I did not get?
> He he. Synchronization point.