Hi, On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
> > > I was going to bring it up at some point too. My preference is > > > strongly to simply eliminate the space on methods... > > Which wouldn't be so weird: in the libstdc++-v3 code we do it all the time. > Yea. I actually reviewed the libstdc++ guidelines to see where they differed > from GNU's C guidelines. > > I'm strongly in favor of dropping the horizontal whitespace between the > method name and its open paren when the result is then dereferenced. > ie foo.last()->e rather than foo.last ()->e. I'd prefer to not write in this style at all, like Jakub. If we must absolutely have it, then I agree that the space before _empty_ parentheses are ugly if followed by references. I.e. I'd like to see spaces before parens as is customary, except in one case: empty parens in the middle of expressions (which don't happen very often right now in GCC, and hence wouldn't introduce a coding style confusion): do.this (); give.that()->flag; get.list (one)->clear (); I'd prefer to not have further references to return values be applied, though (as in, the parentheses should be the end of statement), which would avoid the topic (at the expensive of having to invent names for those temporaries, or to write trivial wrapper methods contracting several method calls). Ciao, Michael.
