D benchmark code review

[Manu]

On 14 December 2013 04:53, David Nadlinger <code at klickverbot.at> wrote:

> On Friday, 13 December 2013 at 17:30:09 UTC, Manu wrote:
>
>> I take druntime and phobos as they are the largest and most widely used
>> body of D code, along with many other projects I've run into that also
>> follow that lead. I'm yet to encounter any exceptions.
>>
>
> If you ever used the Derelict-style bindings for Assimp I threw together
> (and which are hopelessly out of date at this point), which I remember you
> mentioning quite some while ago, that's not true. ;)
>
> I prefer this style and use it for all my personal projects, as I feel it
> makes inferring the structure glancing over the code a bit easier for me.
> Though, honestly, it doesn't really matter to me at this point. I just want
> to point out that I would hardly consider it to be a Java-only thing. The
> style is not only used in the K&R book, but also in many well-known C/C++
> projects such as LLVM, and IIRC is also called for in Google's internal C++
> style guide.


Fair enough. I concede.
The reason I raise the issue is that I like the sense of agreement within
Java. I'd like to think there's opportunity to promote a prevailing
standard in D the same as in Java (especially in code presented for public
scrutiny). The argument simply doesn't come up when writing Java code, and
I like that everyone agrees that way.
I don't care which, I just like consistency. And it seemed to me that the
largest body of D code as maintained by the official community should
probably define such a standard, but clearly that boat has long sailed, so
I guess it doesn't matter.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20131214/b1fa0bfa/attachment.html>