TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 3 Sep 2003 08:41:43 +0200
Reply-To:
Lionel Draghi <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
From:
Lionel Draghi <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Stephen Leake wrote:

> ...
>
>>It helps that I indent calls in the style
>>
>>  Procedure_Name (
>>     Par1 => Val1,
>>     Par2 => Val2);
>>
>>and not as
>>
>>  Procedure_Name (Par1 => Val1,
>>                  Par2 => Val2);
>>
>>which in my eyes make the code look very irregular, since the length
>>of procedure names varies.
>>
>>
>
>I agree on this indentation style.
>
As you all agree on this, i can't resist to disagree :-)
I changed my mind on this point, and stick back to the second style,
because:
1 - it put more emphasis on the operation name, which seems otherwise
embedded within a long parameters column,
2 - and it looks irregural! Operations order is less "obvious" if the
text is to regular.

--
Lionel Draghi                        http://swpat.ffii.org/index.fr.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2