3 ms·
I think the argument for the American style is aesthetics. I don't like it, but I can understand that there are people who prefer what looks better. TFA did n
by hibbelig 5y ago
I think the argument for the American style is aesthetics. I don't like it, but I can understand that there are people who prefer what looks better. TFA did not address this at all, which is a pity.
- programmer_dude 5y agoFWIW the British style looks more aesthetically pleasing to me. The American style reminds me of inappropriately mixed brackets: [(]). Cringe.
- blitzar 5y ago> for the American style is aesthetics Why would you make a style choice to make something less aesthetically pleasing?
- programmer_dude 5y agoI wouldn't and I don't think I am. The American style is not aesthetically pleasing at all. I think you misread my comment or replied to me accidentally.
- blitzar 5y agoI am in agreement with you - I didnt even know this so called american style existed untill now, it makes no sense at all.
- a9h74j 5y agoOddly, perhaps, I wish programming languages would allow or require mixed brackets when working with open- and/or closed-ended ranges.
- mdp2021 5y ago> the argument for the American style is aesthetics Absorption of set theory should make one cringe at 'Abc def. Ghi jkl. Mnop "qrs." Tuv...'. The quotation marks are logically included in the section beginning with 'M', then visually escape it.
- mdp2021 5y ago(Sorry I was rushing and could not ponder more to complete the above as desired) ...It is as if one wrote, [Abc def] [Ghi jkl] [Mnop (qrs]) [Tuv...