+1 - That is how I like it!
-Bryan
> On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:51 PM, James Peach wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I’m starting to see code written like this, with no empty line between
> functions:
>
> void
> foo()
> {
> }
> void
> bar()
> {
> }
>
> I would like to be consistent about keeping a single em
> On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:51 PM, James Peach wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I’m starting to see code written like this, with no empty line between
> functions:
>
> void
> foo()
> {
> }
> void
> bar()
> {
> }
>
This is likely a misbehavior of clang-format. I’ve had it do this on my code.
You can for
+1
> On Jun 7, 2017, at 6:11 AM, Alan Carroll
> wrote:
>
> Seems reasonable to me.
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, 11:51:29 PM CDT, James Peach
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I’m starting to see code written like this, with no empty line between
> functions:
>
> void
> foo()
> {
> }
> void
Seems reasonable to me.
On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, 11:51:29 PM CDT, James Peach
wrote:
Hi all,
I’m starting to see code written like this, with no empty line between
functions:
void
foo()
{
}
void
bar()
{
}
I would like to be consistent about keeping a single empty line between
functions,
Hi all,
I’m starting to see code written like this, with no empty line between
functions:
void
foo()
{
}
void
bar()
{
}
I would like to be consistent about keeping a single empty line between
functions, even inline in class definitions. The extra whitespace makes
it easier to read and to na
