Dimitris Papastamos writes: > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 04:11:16PM +0100, k...@shike2.com wrote: > > > > >> The style(9)-changes were absolutely necessary and it's better to do thi > s > > >> as early as possible instead of waiting and waiting until it's too late > > >> and you have a really big number of patches for a given program. > > > > > > The thing I dislike most about the style changes is the alignment of > > > variable and function definitions, and the reason I don't like > > > alignment-based definitions is because the moment you need to add a new > > > variable or function that has a column that's one character longer than > > > the existing definitions, you end up with a diff that modifies a bunch > > > of a lines that are not necessarily related to the new feature. > > > > > > > I agree with Eric here. I don't see the point of variables alignment.
The point of this rule is not visual alignment. Width of the type doesn't matter; it is always one tab. The advantage is that you can find the declaration of member foo by grepping for ^Ifoo. Similarly, the "function name at beginning of line" rule is so you can find the bar() function definition by grepping for ^bar(. -- Anthony J. Bentley
