> Should be possible, no?
Emacs ;-)
--
Scott Ribe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice
___
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact
Am 04.07.2008 um 18:16 Uhr schrieb Gary L. Wade:
For example, this kind of code just bugs me when I'm balancing
braces back-and-forth:
Well, I find *this* one preferable:
#if WE_WANT_TO_ADD_THIS_FEATURE_IN_FINAL_BUILDS
if (thisTestIsTrue && newFunctionalityIsAvailable) {
#else
if (thi
> Of course, if you're only talking about a few hundred
> lines,
Oh yes, at most. *NEVER* the size code base you're talking about!
--
Scott Ribe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice
___
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev
Scott Ribe wrote:
Anyways, it really is a personal preference. All arguments I've ever seen
that try to claim one style or the other is more correct or safer, are B.S.
(Including the one referenced--the bounds of a block were *ALWAYS*
absolutely vitally important, well before objects & destructor
> Actually, I couldn't agree more with the documentation!
Funny thing is, although I've used the style he advocates for a very long
time (15 years???), I don't agree with his reasoning.
Indentation of *code* should be consistent, an object comes into scope where
it's declared, not at an opening b
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Roni Music
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:13 PM
> To: cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com
> Subject: Re: Style Question (Robert Claeson)
>
> the bottom of the page below has o
the bottom of the page below has one opinion why one style is superior to
the other,
(at least when it comes to C++ and the way C++ objects behave when going out
of scope)
http://www.relisoft.com/book/lang/scopes/2local.html
On 28 Jun 2008, at 06:30, Alex Wait wrote:
I have noticed, co
