Re: [PEPr] Comment on RFC::Coding standard enhancements

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 1:05 AM, Ken Guest <ken@linux.ie> wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Helgi Þormar Þorbjörnsson > <helgith@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Christian Weiske <cweiske@cweiske.de> >> wrote: >> > Hello Stefan, >> > >> > >> >> The split function definition part is contradicting the current >> >> standard, >> >> where the opening brace of the function definition is on its own line.. >> > Yes, and that's intentional. You will be free to do both variants. >> > >> > function a() >> > { >> > //blubb >> > } >> > >> > function b( >> > $with, $too, $much, >> > $parameters >> > ) { >> > //blubb >> > } >> >> >> Really ? I think it should be: >> >> >> function b($with, $too, $much, >> $parameters) >> { >> //blubb >> } >> >> Stays more in line with the current standard. > > > > and I have tended towards the following, with all parameters vertically > aligned, as I find it more readable than the two given options: > > function b($with, > $too, > $much, > $parameters) { > //blubb > } > > k. > if the { stays on a new line, we should not break that rule for some exception. - Helgi