Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: December 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: advdomestic.c cleanup II. (PR#1157)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: advdomestic.c cleanup II. (PR#1157)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mike Kaufman <mkaufman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: advdomestic.c cleanup II. (PR#1157)
From: "Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:15:19 -0500

At 06:39 PM 01/12/31 +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
>Dear diary, on Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 07:49:49PM CET, I got a letter,
>where "Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx> told me, that...
[...]
>> +    build_points_left(acity) > get_unit_type(unit_type)->build_cost *
>> caravans) {
>> 
>> *** Another line wrap.
>Ok. Funny that people told me that I shouldn't do those changes I indent
>will care about them ;-).

Indent is not the saviour of the world, but only a useful starting point.
Once there is a basic pattern to the code, humans are infinitely more
capable of refining the pattern to highlight useful concepts.

I keep telling Raimar that blind application of indent to every patch just 
before it goes in breaks code in many idiotic ways and removes useful added
value of the human touch.

Indent should be applied by a submitter, the code cleaned up to remove the
worst abuse of indent and to make sure it didn't actually change something
significant. Then changes can be applied consistent with the new (local)
coding standard of the code to be fixed. Patchew should then be applied
without additional (and certainly not mechanical) modification.

Cheers,
RossW
=====




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]