Xref: utzoo gnu.emacs.help:606 gnu.g++.help:272 comp.emacs:9750
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!sgi!dragon!dragon!jackr
From: jackr@dblues.wpd.sgi.com (John (Jack) Repenning)
Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,gnu.g++.help,comp.emacs
Subject: Re: C++ mode and << (change request)
Message-ID: <JACKR.90Dec17100716@dblues.dblues.wpd.sgi.com>
Date: 17 Dec 90 10:07:16 GMT
References: <1990Dec11.174324.11176@julius.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@relay.wpd.sgi.com ( CNews Account )
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Lines: 49
In-Reply-To: sane@cs.uiuc.edu's message of 11 Dec 90 17:43:24 GMT

In article <1990Dec11.174324.11176@julius.cs.uiuc.edu> sane@cs.uiuc.edu (Aamod Sane) wants:

Not this:
	   cout << djfhsjdf << sdjfhsdhfjdf
	       << sjhfjshf << sdjfhjkdfh
		    << jsdhfjkhf dfhjksdhf 
			 << jdfhjhdfjhdf << \n

but rather this:

	   cout << sjfjskdf << sdjfhsdkjf
	       << shfdjhf << jahdkjhskjdhf
	       << dhfjhda << sdfhjsdhfjkh
	       << jdhfkjsdhfhs << \n;

I think I agree with Aamod's sense of aesthetics.  In fact, I think I
would go a step further.  What c++-mode is doing with the "<<" lines
here is consistent with what it does with other continuation lines,
and I think I'd like Aamod's treatment applied there, too.  For
example:

	sum = a[0] + a[1] + a[2] + a[3] + a[4] + a[5] + a[6] + a[7] +
	    a[8] + a[9] + a[10] + a[11] + a[12] + a[13] + a[14] +
		a[15] + a[16] + a[17] + a[18] + a[19] + a[20] + a[21]
		    + a[22] + a[23] + a[24] + a[25];

Wouldn't this look better like this?

	sum = a[0] + a[1] + a[2] + a[3] + a[4] + a[5] + a[6] + a[7] +
	    a[8] + a[9] + a[10] + a[11] + a[12] + a[13] + a[14] +
	    a[15] + a[16] + a[17] + a[18] + a[19] + a[20] + a[21] +
	    a[22] + a[23] + a[24] + a[25]; 

It appears to me that the "<<" behavior is merely a consequence of
this more general behavior: what Aamod proposes specifically would be
some kind of special case, while changing the general behavior would
also fix Aamod's desires.  I suppose this hadn't up very often, even
in c-mode, until people started stringing "<<" together.

What I'm wondering is, is there some semantic confusion here I should
consider?  Does the cascading indentation represent some meaning that
ought to be preserved?  Does the columnar indentation suggest
something that it oughtn't?  What does this group's readership think?



----------------
Jack Repenning			9U-530			     jackr@wpd.sgi.com
Silicon Graphics, Inc.				            Off:(415) 335-7477