Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      23 Nov 2002 11:47:23 -0800
From:      swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen)
To:        David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU>
Cc:        Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Style(9) question
Message-ID:  <8gof8g83w4.f8g@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20021122214405.GA11011@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
References:  <20021122193040.GA23078@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20021122214405.GA11011@HAL9000.homeunix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU> writes:

> Your complaint is a specific form of ``I don't like $requirement
> in the style guide, can we change it?''  Everyone has a list of
> criticisms like this, and that would be fine if we all had the
> same set of beliefs about what the One True Style(9) should say.
> (I, for one, don't agree with your specific quibble.)  The present
> style(9) is a compromise that we can all grudgingly agree on,
> because it's better than having different styles strewn all over
> the codebase.

That last sentence has two problems.  The first part is only true
because the grudging agreement defines the "we".  The second part is
only true for some people.  Others (almost all, I suspect) agree on it
not because it's better or worse than having different styles, but
because they need to "go along to get along" in response to a semi-
civilized form of mob rule.  In addition, I'll argue that having a
single style is better only in particular cases and that the issue of
"better than having different styles?" should be given priority over
which style is best, in each case.

The OP's complaint might better have been a form of: "there are too many
requirements in the style guide, and this is one example of a
requirement which, regardless of the merit of the particular style in
each developer's mind (or that of whoever controls the style guide),
costs more than it is worth for these reasons:

"1) People waste more time fixing intrusions of the illegal style than
would be spent by people illegally changing other people's style if
there were no requirement (those changes being a well-known no-no).

"2) The additional requirement screens out some potential developers who
won't agree (even grudgingly) to develop under one too many requirements
which they consider lame and over-burdensome.

"3) The assumed benefit of a particular standard style has not been
demonstrated, the style being more likely to be just a idiosyncratic
artifact of a once-influential developer who got his way as a sort of
ego-payment for services rendered."

Even the fact that a particular style has 90% who strongly prefer it
versus 10% who weakly dislike it shouldn't be a reason for making the
style a requirement.  There should be a demonstrable benefit of having
the requirement.  There would clearly be problems if indentation size
was not standardized.  But before arguing whether single statements
should be bracketed or not, the need for any rule at all should be
argued.  I happen to think that benefits of standardizing this
particular style are smaller than trouble it causes.  It's easy for
people to deal with a mixture of styles in this case.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8gof8g83w4.f8g>