From: Dave Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-03-15 22:06:07
on 3/15/00 9:45 AM, Ed Brey at brey_at_[hidden] wrote:
> In general, I believe there is no one right answer. The optimal
> presentation of the source code depends on the nature of the program
> being developed and the internal brain workings of the reader/writer
> of the code. To the extent reasonable, I'd like to see the boost
> conventions provide the least restrictive set of possibilities from
> which a contributer, reviewer, or user can choose an optimal
I just want to cast a vote in the opposite direction.
An important purpose (I daresay the primary purpose) of source code is
communication: the documentation of intent. This is a doubly important goal
for boost, I think. Using a fixed-width font allows us to communicate with
more people, in more ways (diagrams are possible) right there in the source.
Code written for fixed-width fonts using spaces will read reasonably well
when viewed with a variable-width font, and as far as I can tell every
editor supporting variable-width fonts also supports fixed width. I don't
think the converse is true.
An unhappy coincidence is that I've been asked to write my group's coding
standard at work, and I've just released it this week. Now I am fighting
with a few peoples' personal preferences, trying to get the standard to
stick on the basis of engineering merit. I wish we could do something else
on the boost list!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk