Re: [PATCH] Drivemap module

[Isaac Dupree <id@isaac.cedarswampstudios.org>]

Javier Martín wrote:
> You understand my concern, but seemingly do not understand that in order
> to conform to the Holy Coding Style you are asking me to write code that
> can become buggy (and with a very hard to trace bug) with a simple
> deltion! (point: did you notice that last word _without_ a spelling
> checker? Now try to do so in a multithousand-line program).

well, maybe a bit off topic.
But I can't imagine how, after code is written, I could 
accidentally delete an "=" character even when editing it. 
I prefer the (to me) intuitive meaning of (variable == 
value) in my own code.  That particular problem has never 
bitten me.  Although, in C++ coding style, a lot more local 
variables are "const" and therefore the error could be 
caught by the compiler anyway.  It seems like an odd 
paranoia to choose.  Say, take "uint32_t".  It's only a 
one-character deletion to become int32_t and then there is 
subtle breakage.  "htons" and many other functions with 
similar names and suffixes.  Etc.?  It's half C language and 
culture, and half inevitable in programming, IMHO.

point[2]: I half did notice the typo (only "half" because 
I've trained myself not to be too distracted by people's 
spelling), and I'm generally more precise when looking at 
code (maybe). ;-)

Anyway, since "they" are more likely to maintain the code in 
the long run than you, in general, the question is whether 
the code is more likely to become buggy by their hacking on 
it, if it follows project coding style or someone else's 
(your) "safer" coding style.  Likely it's safer if using a 
consistent programming style.  Although I personally don't 
see that it's very helpful to have a style that makes things 
down to the order of "==" arguments be consistent within the 
project; haphazard only slows reading the tiniest bit, and I 
don't think it makes a different what order the arguments are...

-Isaac