On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Mike Cheponis wrote:

# On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, Simon J. Gerraty wrote:
# 
# I think the Bottom Line is: 8-space tabs produces less comprehensible code
# by 20% to 30% compared with the same code indented 2 to 4 spaces.

That wasn't what you said the survey said.  You said that they preferred
2 to 4 spaces over _no indentation_ (unless I missed something in my
admittedly hasty reading).

# 
# If somebody has factual data that refutes the conclusion of the CACM article,
# then please bring it forth!
# 
# Else, I believe, regardless of our collective prejudices, the facts remain.

Well, those of us with *our collective prejudices* have been doing this
sort of thing longer than I've been able to spell "subroutine".

In my personal code, I use 4 spaces on each indent.  I like it that
way.  8 spaces goes in way too far.  However, if I ever submit any
changes for our kernel, you can be sure I will respect the 8-space
tabs for just that reason -- respect.  For my elders, in a sense, if
one must put it that way.

I have not read all the responses yet, but gratuitously changing
something as niggly as tab indentation in KNF when there are other
areas which could stand improvement does not strike me as a constructive
use of time.

Be glad KNF wasn't dictated by someone else who had no regard for the
80-column terminal.  I worked with such a person who wrote scripts in K
shell, of all things, and their lines were somewhere between 90 and 110
characters in length (as were his output error messages, and the routine
names he used were no less than 32 characters long...  I took him to task
and asked him not to code like that from that point forward so that I
could assume the position of maintainter, as I had been assigned to do.
He refused on the grounds that "nobody uses 80-column terminals anymore."
He got fired by the head of engineering.).

So count your blessings.

...and, oh, by the way, when _can_ we get rid of __P?

# -Mike

				--*greywolf;
--
NetBSD: I Wanna Be Sedated!