smh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Steven M. Haflich) (07/25/83)
I have always formated my C code as follows: for (...) { ... } This is an abbreviation of the more rational: for (...) { ... } Since I rarely make listings and usually only see my code through a standard (but small) 24-line CRT window, the saved lines make more code visible at one time. Even when dealing with listings, I find the more fits on a page, the easier to read largish programs. For the same reasons, I have no compunction about formatting short, clear, "idiomatic" code blocks this way: if (argc>1) { pname = *argv++; argc--; } Steve Haflich
berry@fortune.UUCP (07/25/83)
#R:ucbesvax:4800019:fortune:16200006:000:414 fortune!berry Jul 25 11:50:00 1983 I personally have found the following style of {} quite easy to read and type. I don't know actually where I picked up each statement, but they did come from a variety of places and I believe they do form a fairly complete and consistent set: if() { ... } struct gorp { ... } = { ... } ...; switch() { case : ... } David W. Berry amd70!fortune!berry cbosgd!... harpo!... hpda!...
zz1sm@sdccsu3.UUCP (Shane) (07/27/83)
I also use
for (;;) {
...
}
because it gets more code on a page, and
for (;;) { short; stuff; }
for the same reason.
Shane
!ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdccsu3!zz1sm
cfv@packet.UUCP (07/31/83)
I started out writing almost all of my code using: for (;';) { ... } for nesting, but in the last 6 months I found that I had unconsiously switched to the K&R form of: for (;;) { ... } Why I did is still a bit of a mystery to me. I think that I did it because as I became a better C programmer (writer and reader) I didn't need that explicitly visual form of nesting as badly, and it was nice to compact those lines together (white space is wonderful, but appropriate white space is best). Now that I use K&R's nesting, I find that it IS a lot more compact, but I haven't lost any of the readability of the code that I used the first form for. -- >From the dungeons of the Warlock: Chuck Von Rospach ucbvax!amd70!packet!cfv (chuqui@mit-mc) <- obsolete!