From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID, TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,21bbcb8deeeab673,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Chris Sparks (Mr. Ada)" Subject: Re: Ada95 Pretty-Printers/Coding styles Date: 1997/06/16 Message-ID: <33A54D07.4E14@aisf.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 248833928 Sender: Ada programming language Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU Organization: McDonnell Douglas Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I am sure I am going to be flamed for my opinions on pretty printers/ coding styles, however, that's life! :-) I feel that enforcing strict coding styles on individuals is unproductive and a source of irritation. If a company really wants to have complete 100% consistency, then a tool should be used to generate company-approved code. What's even more irritating is when attending code reviews where most of the discussion is about spacing and case of identifiers. Argh!! This may be what is happening at my company, however, I am sure it happens elsewhere. Robert states: "Personally I would fire such a programmer, but that is an extreme position, which many companies are not will to follow, and instead they tolerate unnecessary variation". I find this VERY extreme since we humans are not machines and cannot be expected to work 100% in unison. Not even the Borg has 100% commitment among its ranks of automatons! That is why I feel that a filter (either a separate tool (Best) or a compiler switch (OK)) is really one way to assure consistency. Later... Chris Sparks