Re: c.l.c wiki update


In article <pan.2006.01.21.06.00.50.382144@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Netocrat <netocrat@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> Disclosure: K&R is the style I first (implicitly - not necessarily
> completely or accurately) learnt and it's still my preferred style. The
> suggestion came from two other people though.
>
> The reason I think it's likely to be most acceptable is that it was
> developed by the founders of the language. Someone with a mind to
> architect a programming language as successful as C is likely to make a
> good job of an accompanying style.

I'm not going to advocate for or against a particular style here, but
this argument seems very weak to me. I don't see any evidence to
support the thesis that a language designer is necessarily interested
in style in general.

Further, I don't see any basis for arguing that a language designer's
style preference has any objective weight. What makes a language's
developer any more of an authority on what constitutes a good style?
The only warrant for that claim seems to be one of authority by
association: the designer is an authority on the language, and hence
one on its proper use. There's no logical justification.

> Given that style is so subjective, the
> property "given birth to alongside the language and endorsed by its
> parents" is a pretty objective basis for preference (unless there's
> another style I don't know of with that property).

I don't think it's objective at all. The fact of its origin is, but
attachment to preference is not.

> Would you suggest leaving the style guidelines at "consistent"?

I would, perhaps with suggestions such as moderate line length,
avoiding //-style comments, and avoiding tabs (or at least the mixing
of tabs and spaces for indentation). I'd be happier, personally, to
see no guidelines than to see too many. As with prose style, I
believe style guidelines are often counterproductive, leading to a
tiresome and sometimes awkward consistency for no sake but its own.

But in the end, it's the editors of the Wiki who are doing the work,
and the decision should be yours.

--
Michael Wojcik michael.wojcik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Shakespeare writes bombast and knows it; Mr Thomas writes bombast and
doesn't. That is the difference. -- Geoffrey Johnson
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: c.l.c wiki update
    ... >> The reason I think it's likely to be most acceptable is that it was ... >> developed by the founders of the language. ... designer of C at least had a powerful sense for style, ... > style preference has any objective weight. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Back to the topic....
    ... My preference is C#. ... port VB6 apps to VB.NET. ... This is not very natural for an OO language. ... really easy, though, to use Interop because of this. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Getting the prefered language of the browser
    ... a language and an optional preference value. ... While *MY* web browser appears to sort language preference ...
    (perl.beginners)
  • Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada)
    ... >> Stroustrup said in an interview that his preference would have been ... and a cleaner language than C++ became. ... C++ was never meant solely for object-oriented programming ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada)
    ... >> Stroustrup said in an interview that his preference would have been ... and a cleaner language than C++ became. ... C++ was never meant solely for object-oriented programming ...
    (comp.lang.ada)