D benchmark code review

[Manu]

I only made the point (among a bunch of other points!) because I wondered
if it was worth presenting consistency in D code intended for public
scrutiny. It's all good, it's settled now. It's not my fault, or my intent,
that the most trivial point in my list of comments is the one that
apparently stimulated the most discussion... :/
On 14 Dec 2013 14:00, <"Ola Fosheim Grøstad\" &
lt;ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>"@puremagic.com> wrote:

> Mmm, I prefer C braces for this reason.
>>
>
> There is no such thing as "C-braces" or idiomatic C. C is defined
> by anarchy and chaos. The reason old C-code (and guides) have
> braces on the next line for function calls is that the type was
> specified under the parameter-list in old-style C.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indent_style
>
> Fixed rules for whitespace leads to poor legibility, creating legible
> layout is a context sensitive design problem.
>
> No wonder the D-language is stuck in a state of poor usability
> with discussions like this eating all the bandwidth…
>
> And, why, why, why would anyone think that it is a good idea to
> use the boolean negate-operator for templates? Talk about making
> my eyes sore! D has a large heap of usability and inconsistency
> problems that makes freedom-of-whitespace a drop in a biiiig
> ocean. Get real, you need to focus on real challenges if you want
> D to take off!
>
> (back to lurking)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20131214/95581b2e/attachment.html>