Re: [Corelinux-develop] Bug #113984

[Frank V. C. <fr...@co...>]

Hans Dulimarta wrote:
> 
> "Frank V. Castellucci" wrote:
> >
> > Hans Dulimarta wrote:
> > >
> > > Frank, I thought I fixed bug 113984 (header alignments).
> > > But again I checked the cppstnd.tex and could not find any
> > > appropriate guidelines.
> > >
> > > You wrote the following three lines in the bug report:
> > >
> > > [#1] Method comments should left justify with return type in signature.
> > > [#2] Method signatures should left justify with return types in
> > > signature.
> > > [#3] Return types generally align on a four level indentation depth.
> >
> > What I meant by #3 can be summarized in the header file
> > MutexSemaphoreGroup.hpp, so in answer to your graphic depiction, yes it
> > is correct with the exception of the class MyClass opening brace (which
> > should line up with 'class' on the next line.
> >
> > Now, this has mostly been my organization and alignment which for me is
> > readable. How do you feel about it?
> 
> Personally, I prefer the comments flushed left with any
> modifiers, which means
> that 4 level indentation does not apply. But, I guess for
> this project I have
> to decline my own preferences.

I guess the goal/objective is that whatever the standard is, that the
code be consistent. So if we started with flushing left the comments
with the modifiers, as long as we stuck to it, would have been ok. And
this is your project now! :)

BTW: Are you done with the checking in for the moment?

> 
> >
> > >
> > > My questions:
> > > Point #1 and #2 were clearly understood.
> > > Point #3 is a bit unclear: when you mentioned "4-level deep", which
> > > column is the reference column? I assume it is 4-level deep relative
> > > to the "class" keyword.
> > >
> > > Is the following correctly indented according to the above 'guidelines'?
> > > (leading blanks were replaced with = or -)
> > >
> > > namespace corelinux {
> > >
> > > ===class MyClass {
> > > ===---===---===/**
> > > ===---===---===---constructors have no return type.
> > > ===---===---===---I assume the return type is "empty string"
> > > ===---===---===*/
> > > ===---===---===MyClass( params );
> > >
> > > ===---===---===/// comment for virtual MethodA
> > > ===---virtual  ReturnType MethodA( signature ... );
> > >
> > > ===---===---===/// comment for methodB
> > > ===---===---===void MethodB ( signature ... );
> > > ===};
> > > }
> > >
> > > I think we should add this "guideline" to the C++ Coding standard.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Hans Dulimarta, Ph.D.                  dul...@co...
> > > P: 517-432-7589             http://www.egr.msu.edu/~dulimart
> > > F: 760-281-7691             http://corelinux.sourceforge.net
> > > Elec. & Comp. Engg., Mich. State Univ., E. Lansing, MI 48824
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Corelinux-develop mailing list
> > > Cor...@li...
> > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/corelinux-develop
> >
> > --
> > Frank V. Castellucci
> > _______________________________________________
> > Corelinux-develop mailing list
> > Cor...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/corelinux-develop
> 
> --
> Hans Dulimarta, Ph.D.                  dul...@co...
> P: 517-432-7589
> http://www.egr.msu.edu/~dulimart
> F: 760-281-7691             http://corelinux.sourceforge.net
> Elec. & Comp. Engg., Mich. State Univ., E. Lansing, MI 48824
> _______________________________________________
> Corelinux-develop mailing list
> Cor...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/corelinux-develop

-- 
Frank V. Castellucci
http://corelinux.sourceforge.net
OOA/OOD/C++ Standards and Guidelines for Linux
http://PythPat.sourceforge.net
Pythons Pattern Package