Re: indent

[Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>]

> Paul Richards wrote:
> > 
> > There are other cosmetic type changes to make post 1.2, such as
> > cleaning up the configuration directives to be compatible with
> > autoconf so I think when the 2.0 branch is created we should hold off
> > real development for a few days, everyone should release their checked
> > out copies of the tree and we should do all these cleanup jobs before
> > people start hacking again.
> > 
> > Anyone with work in progress will get badly bitten by layout changes
> > which is why we should make this more organised.
> > 
> 
> I was under the impression that once we did the Feature Freeze
> and then applied all the patches (basically, freezing 1.2-beta
> "as is"), that someone would then indent all the sources
> and call _that_ the official 1.2beta. We would test that version
> out internally before releasing it publicly. I agree that doing it
> now would be a mistake because of patches in the works.

I agree. I see no reason to put this off. Sorting these kind of 
things out is what the beta cycle is for.

+1 on indenting for b1.

Re: indent

[Paul Richards <p....@elsevier.co.uk>]

rasmus@bellglobal.com writes:

> 
> > > I was under the impression that once we did the Feature Freeze
> > > and then applied all the patches (basically, freezing 1.2-beta
> > > "as is"), that someone would then indent all the sources
> > > and call _that_ the official 1.2beta. We would test that version
> > > out internally before releasing it publicly. I agree that doing it
> > > now would be a mistake because of patches in the works.
> > 
> > I agree. I see no reason to put this off. Sorting these kind of 
> > things out is what the beta cycle is for.

Absolutely not. A beta cycle is for testing the code and making minor
fixes not reformatting the whole lot!

> > +1 on indenting for b1.
> 
> This is going to make cvs go crazy though.  Tracing bugs back through
> a completely reformatted source tree is going to be a nightmare.  Imagine
> the diff you are going to get when you compare a pre-indent to a post-indent
> version.  Do you really feel it is worth it?  I don't understand the
> argument of, "the current code is unreadable".  If somebody finds it so
> unreadable, just run indent on it locally and read that.

Precisely.

-- 
  Paul Richards. Originative Solutions Ltd.  (Netcraft Ltd. contractor)
  Elsevier Science TIS online journal project.
  Email: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk
  Phone: 0370 462071 (Mobile), +44 (0)1865 843155

Re: indent

[ra...@bellglobal.com]

> > I was under the impression that once we did the Feature Freeze
> > and then applied all the patches (basically, freezing 1.2-beta
> > "as is"), that someone would then indent all the sources
> > and call _that_ the official 1.2beta. We would test that version
> > out internally before releasing it publicly. I agree that doing it
> > now would be a mistake because of patches in the works.
> 
> I agree. I see no reason to put this off. Sorting these kind of 
> things out is what the beta cycle is for.
> 
> +1 on indenting for b1.

This is going to make cvs go crazy though.  Tracing bugs back through
a completely reformatted source tree is going to be a nightmare.  Imagine
the diff you are going to get when you compare a pre-indent to a post-indent
version.  Do you really feel it is worth it?  I don't understand the
argument of, "the current code is unreadable".  If somebody finds it so
unreadable, just run indent on it locally and read that.

I agree that a common format would be nice, and when you edit a block of code,
try to follow the agreed-upon formatting standard.  Slowly but surely the
code tree will get more and more uniform.

-Rasmus