At 11:15 PM 3/17/2002 -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Friday 08 March 2002 23:02, Melvin Smith wrote:
> > I vote for non-enforcement of this one.
>
>Er, did you mean "removal"? Having rules that aren't enforced is
>counter-productive in the long run.
No, I meant, I want a special "get out of
On Friday 08 March 2002 23:02, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> This is my only nitpick with the coding standards.
>
> I never cared for the style of putting return type on a
> separate line above the function declaration header.
>
> I like it just as the prototype.
>
> I vote for no
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is my only nitpick with the coding standards.
>
> I never cared for the style of putting return type on a
> separate line above the function declaration header.
>
> I like it just as the prototype.
>
> I vote for non-enforcement of this one.
perso
Just my 2 cents.
This is my only nitpick with the coding standards.
I never cared for the style of putting return type on a
separate line above the function declaration header.
I like it just as the prototype.
I vote for non-enforcement of this one.
-Melvin
