Re: Source Code Formatting Standard Update

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

jyqvklioo@googlemail.com writes:

 > I plea that the Standard be amended so that the { placement for the
 > start of a body of a non-enclosed function is consistent with use
 > otherwise.

-1

No thank you.  Good standards are good, bad standards are bad,
changing standards are the worst.  There is no strong reason to
change on the table, so let's not.

If you don't like the GNU standard, don't adopt it in your own
projects.  At the start of a new cooperative project, argue for what
you consider a more rational standard.  However, projects that have
followed it for a long time, including the whole GNU project, should
continue to do so unless a strong technical reason for changing can be
advanced.  A little bit of extra work for automatic formatters and
those who write them is not such a reason.

 > The increased consistency will also make it possible to have
 > simpler implementations of automatic formatting software.

What could be simpler than to just let Emacs do it?