|
Geometry : |
Subject: [ggl] Reviewing GGL against Boost requirements
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz)
Date: 2009-04-20 06:29:28
Bruno Lalande wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> If these are the guidelines we'll follow them. Alas they don't give a
>>> number of spaces but let's take 4, as this is used in MPL and probably
>>> everywhere. So re-tabbing is not necessary.
>> OK. Four is perfect for me.
>
> Yep I had seen this divergence from Boost guidelines when I joined the
> project. Didn't do anything at that moment but I knew it would be
> necessary in case of inclusion into Boost. And if you want to follow
> the 80 characters guideline, it's necessary to not use tabs, for
> obvious reasons. So let's go ahead and replace tabs by 4 spaces.
That's a good point! OK
> One thing about 80 characters: this guideline in much more easy to
> follow when namespaces are not indented. It's the case in a lot of
> Boost code and it's quite accepted in the C++ community. So given the
> number of nested namespaces we sometimes have in GGL we could do that
> as well. I've never noticed any particular problem of readability in
> code I've written that way.
So, we're going to not to indent code on namespace level, right?
If I am, do we assume this scheme?
namespace a {
class T
{
public:
void foo();
protected:
void bar();
private:
std::size_t count_;
};
} // namespace a
Best regards,
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net