Re: master f3891da4972 1/2: ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.

Re: master f3891da4972 1/2: ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.

[Po Lu]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> branch: master
> commit f3891da49722a5e8a9f68435c8af13d24e03a6be
> Author: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Commit: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>
>     ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.

Why?  (standards)Formatting states:

   For ‘struct’ and ‘enum’ types, likewise put the braces in column one,
unless the whole contents fits on one line:

     struct foo
     {
       int a, b;
     }
or
     struct foo { int a, b; }

Re: master f3891da4972 1/2: ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 15:55:49 +0800
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > branch: master
> > commit f3891da49722a5e8a9f68435c8af13d24e03a6be
> > Author: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> > Commit: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> >
> >     ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.
> 
> Why?  (standards)Formatting states:

We don't adhere to that part of the coding standards, and I see no
reason why we should start now.

(The original reason, now lost to history, was that CC Mode produced
better indentation that way.)

Re: master f3891da4972 1/2: ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.

[Po Lu]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> We don't adhere to that part of the coding standards, and I see no
> reason why we should start now.

When was this decision made?

> (The original reason, now lost to history, was that CC Mode produced
> better indentation that way.)

Wasn't that the indentation that is nowadays only applied to `enum's,
i.e.,

struct foo
  {
    int x, y;
  };

Re: master f3891da4972 1/2: ; * src/w32image.c (thumb_type_data): Revert parts of recent change.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 19:21:50 +0800
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > We don't adhere to that part of the coding standards, and I see no
> > reason why we should start now.
> 
> When was this decision made?

Long ago.  Just look at the sources.

> > (The original reason, now lost to history, was that CC Mode produced
> > better indentation that way.)
> 
> Wasn't that the indentation that is nowadays only applied to `enum's,
> i.e.,
> 
> struct foo
>   {
>     int x, y;
>   };

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, but standards.texi says
to use the same format for struct's and enum's.

Also, neither CC Mode nor c-ts-mode produce a 2-space offset before
braces in a struct that is declared at top level.