> I support this too… leads to more noise in, and less readability of, the
> patch.
>
>
>
> Readability of the patch is not harmed with modern tooling (with
> whitespace being highlighted differently to content changes).
>
>
>
> Legibility of the code (not patch) should always be preferred IMO. To aid
> code comprehension, we should aim for density of useful information for the
> reader; wasting a dozen or more lines on zero information density, solely
> to solve a problem already handled by modern diff tools, is a false economy.
>
We are talking about one extra line, not a dozen or more.
It also improves the readability of the code IMHO.
> > I would also like to suggest that an operator should always carry on
> line wraps
>
>
>
> For the ternary operator I agree, however I am less convinced in other
> cases. String concatenation is probably cleaner with the opposite norm, so
> that string literals are aligned.
>
IMHO it works for string concatenation too.
The example that comes to mind is
a)
*method*(
"aaaaaaaaaaaaa",
"bbbbbbbbbbbbb",
"ccccccccccccc"
)
b)
*method*(
"aaaaaaaaaaaaa" +
"bbbbbbbbbbbbb" +
"ccccccccccccc"
)
c)
*method*(
"aaaaaaaaaaaaa"
+ "bbbbbbbbbbbbb"
+ "ccccccccccccc"
)
Once the code gets more real, it is faster to read the difference between
(a) and (c) than it (a) and (b).
