<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"><html><head><meta name="qrichtext" content="1" /><style type="text/css">p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }</style></head><body style=" font-family:'Consolas'; font-size:11pt; font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">On Saturday 05 July 2008, David Jarvie wrote:<br>
> On Sat 5 July 2008 20:25:19 Maksim Orlovich wrote:<br>
> > > this discussion was had quite thoroughly, including on this list. this<br>
> > > is the<br>
> > > one point there was broad consensus on, in fact. restarting<br>
> > > conversations evern N months is not useful, and we have mailing list<br>
> > > archives for this purpose.<br>
><br>
> When this was discussed previously, I didn't think to question the<br>
> desirability of relatively detailed coding rules. I happen to have had the<br>
> new (to me) thought that this isn't actually necessary. That's why I voiced<br>
> this opinion. Or is that not allowed?<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>Voicing your opinion is certainly allowed. Going "me too!" all the time for topics which have already been discussed is poor form on any mailing list, which is why there were requests to not bring this up again and again. :)<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>I think Lubos asked a good question and backed it up with some statistics on the code base, and who knows, that may yet lead to the "mass style guide" fix once and for all.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>But why try to hijack the thread in order to try to rehash something which was already decided last time? It wasn't fun then, it won't be fun now.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>> KDE is a free software project. Beyond setting some basic rules, why can't<br>
> freedom apply to coding style as well, especially since it's something that<br>
> a lot of people have strong (and divergent) views about.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>It doesn't apply to *KDE*, it applies to kdelibs.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>> AFAICS, the only justification for an official coding style is to ensure<br>
> code is readable. That doesn't require detailed rules.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>No one said it did. Lubos suggested a modification (relaxing) to the rules based on experience with it. If we're going to continue debating this the topic at hand is whether Lubos's idea is good or not, not whether rules are good or not.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"></p>Regards,<br>
- Michael Pyne</p></body></html>