Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of msebor@gmail.com designates
 74.125.46.29 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to
         :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:sender;
        b=KpbnG24zAJshEyGa0XbzR/0Psfpjj6RoXZ6ZLuWViFooHXkfyLV7eWh2MWMgBBk6iZ
         1YTKxGMrzwW7jr/qWo3Fo/VayZj+9NKxFZLplPalGW/J6LEdAdtOlPK3k8nzRhRiCpWn
         mHM/P+A+fVsS3NVo3UBvmjtv/6/uqcejlS82k=
Message-ID: <4864245A.1040805@roguewave.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:20:58 -0600
From: Martin Sebor <sebor@roguewave.com>
Organization: Rogue Wave Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: spacing suggestion for new code
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>

While reviewing all the new code that's been added I'm finding it
difficult to spot where one namespace-scope definition ends and
another starts because the spacing between them (the number of
newlines) is the same as the spacing between members, namely 1
blank line. I find code easier to read when namespace scope
definitions of functions and classes that span more than one
line are separated by two blank lines.

Existing code likely isn't completely consistent in this regard,
and I'm sure examples of both styles could be found, but I'd like
to think the two-line style is prevalent. Either way, in the
interest of readability, I'd like to suggest that we adopt the
two-line spacing style for all new code. Yes?

Martin