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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,259541b8a8a12b6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-29 06:50:13 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail From: Erik Magnuson Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Bad coding standards - aesthetics are irrelevant Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 14:44:06 GMT Organization: Deja.com Message-ID: <92i7vk$cke$1@nnrp1.deja.com> References: <3A429639.53D3EA9E@acm.org> <92fobl$f93$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3A4B9FB8.AFD69726@acm.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.218.185.1 X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Dec 29 14:44:06 2000 GMT X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0) X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x66.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 38.218.185.1 X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDmaderikm Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3452 Date: 2000-12-29T14:44:06+00:00 List-Id: In article <3A4B9FB8.AFD69726@acm.org>, Marin David Condic wrote: > While one can always come up with creative solutions to this sort of thing, > I think it still remains that there are going to be things about coding > style and conventions that cannot be solved by algorithm. I agree you cannot automate everything. But I also think that you should automate what you can so that you can devote more attention to the rest. After all, if your pretty-printer already matches your style guidelines, running it will either make no changes at all or just fix a few minor mistakes. While the "preserve 1st use" rule was not perfect, it was both easy to implement and worked most of the time. Who was it that said, "Better is the enemy of good enough?" -- Erik Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/