From: Daryle Walker (dwalker07_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-28 03:27:52
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 8:34 AM, Larry Evans wrote:
> Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>> (More sadly, I was much impeded in trying to understand much of
>> Larry's work in progress on account of the bizarre layout - this
>> would be an serious impediment to acceptance by Boosters - see the
>> Boost coding guidelines?)
> OK. I concede it's bizarre, but I really didn't think it would impede
> understanding. I've just been using it for years and it has some
> distinct advantages (IMHO) over the Boost guidelines. However, I been
> thinking about writing a program to just move the ";"'s to the end of
> line using maybe spirit or wave. I was also thinking about using a
> filter or decorator to do that :) Now I have more of a reason to do
Was the code machine-generated (e.g. Perl script, etc.)? I was
wondering that when I noticed that the statements end (as always) and
_begin_ (sometimes) with semicolons (there's only one semicolon between
consecutive statements), and empty functions still have one semicolon.
What advantages does your style have?
I'm still wondering about some of the design decisions, though. It
doesn't help that it's hard to figure out the designs due to the
unusual writing style.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk