Code readability about ddbus

[WebFreak001]

I agree, it was bothering me when I was working with it too. But in order to keep this consistent we should be using dfmt. Something which comes close to your suggestions with dfmt would be this editorconfig:

[*]
dfmt_brace_style = otbs
dfmt_space_after_keywords = true
dfmt_space_after_cast = true
indent_style = space
indent_size = 2

[thaven]

I agree auto-formatting would generally be the right thing to do. However, dfmt actually doesn't really do its full job yet. (For example, when applying otbs style, it won't add braces to single-line conditionals.)

Also, it does not seem to support a style that places braces the way I'd like them. When limiting our choices to what dfmt supports, it's tempting to go with 'allman', as it's the only one that places the opening brace of a function on its own line (which I'd really like).

Also, dfmt doesn't respect a choice to list function parameters vertically when they won't fit on one line. E.g. (from ddbus.exception)

package T wrapErrors(T)(
  T delegate(DBusError *err) del,
  string file = __FILE__,
  size_t line = __LINE__,
  Throwable next = null
) {
  // ...
}

gets reformatted by dfmt (otbs style) like

package T wrapErrors(T)(T delegate(DBusError* err) del, string file = __FILE__,
    size_t line = __LINE__, Throwable next = null) {
  // ...
}

The first one is definitely more readable.

So yes, dfmt will certainly help maintaining a consistent formatting, but it won't bring us optimal readability.

[trishume]

I'm okay with this. If @WebFreak001 is also okay with this, go ahead.