typedefs, etc. - (nf)

[ajs at hpfcla.UUCP]

#R:cincy:-116500:hpfcla:43800003:000:1514
hpfcla!ajs    Jan  7 16:34:00 1984

Sigh...  I'm all for logical  arguments,  when they apply.  (I'm all for
posting to the right  group, too, but you have to wade into battle where
the action is.)  Anyway,  I'm  convinced  that there are few cases where
purely logical  arguments,  without reference to human nature, result in
software that IN PRACTICE is easier to maintain than otherwise.

For example, someone stated that function  parentheses are syntactically
part of the function call, not the  arguments, so you shouldn't  leave a
blank  between  the name and the left paren.  Sounds good in  principle,
but which of these is easier to read?

	myfunc(arg1, arg2, arg3);	/* barble one widget */

	myfunc (arg1, arg2, arg3);	/* barble one widget */

Like many people, I find that the left paren gets lost in the first case
(everything up to the comma looks like one token).  I suppose that:

	myfunc( arg1, arg2, arg3 );	/* barble it again */

might solve that  problem if it weren't so opposite of English (it hides
the function call and highlights the arguments).

For  similar  reasons I like  parens  in  returns,  even if they are not
required.  They emphasize the "return" and enclose the value.

Nevermind,   it's  hopeless,   this  is  a  religious   issue!  Just  be
consistent,  whatever  you do, and take  pity on those who will  support
your code after you ascend to greater things.

Alan Silverstein, Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Systems Division, Colorado
{ihnp4 | hplabs}!hpfcla!ajs, 303-226-3800 x3053, N 40 31'31" W 105 00'43"