On Tuesday 18 January 2011, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> +# This is useful when using automake's parallel tests mode, to print
> >> +# the reason for skip/failure to console, rather than to the .log files.
> >> +: ${stderr_fileno_=2}
> >> +
> >> +warn_() { echo "$@" 1>&$stderr_fileno_; }
> >> +fail_() { warn_ "$me: failed test: $@"; Exit 1; }
> >> +skip_() { warn_ "$me: skipped test: $@"; Exit 77; }
> >> +framework_failure_() { warn_ "$me: set-up failure: $@"; Exit 99; }
> >
> > space before ()
>
> I don't mind adding spaces before () in gnulib's copy, if that makes
> it easier for you. However, I normally use a space there for readability
> (in shell scripts, at least -- no risk of automatic formatters ;-),
> but with those trailing underscores serving much the same purpose,
> the existing formatting does not bother me at all. Hmm... though
> now that I think of it, with the existing formatting, it is perhaps
> too easy to mistake those function names for their underscore-free
> versions. So I'll change it in gnulib.
>
> However, I think that spreading those four function definitions onto 12
> or more lines for the sake of formatting would represent a significant
> net loss in readability.
>
FWIW, I'm fine with keeping the formatting of those function definitions
as close as possible to the copy in gnulib: I'm not bothered if they're
not 100% complaint with GNU formatting standards. OTOH, this is Ralf's
call in the end, so I'll follow his decision (P.S. He seems to agree with
me on this).
Regards,
Stefano
