Proposed indentation fixes

[Andrew Talbot]

Hi All,

I'm intending to "correct" some indentation anomalies, and I propose to do
this in an "indiscriminate" way. In other words, I would set the
indentation to match what the code does now, without any interpretation of
what may have been intended. This means that something like

if (a)
        b;
        c;

would become

1)
    if (a)
        b;
    c;

rather than

2)
    if (a)
    {
        b;
        c;
    }

The advantages are that the code is "honest" and the existing behaviour is
preserved. The disadvantages are that if (2) were intended, it won't be
achieved here, and the corrected version will no longer "suggest" what was
really intended.

Is this "automatic" method still the way to go?

Thanks,

[Alistair Leslie-Hughes]

"Andrew Talbot"  wrote in message 
news:[e-mail]...
> Hi All,
>
> I'm intending to "correct" some indentation anomalies, and I propose to do
> this in an "indiscriminate" way. In other words, I would set the
> indentation to match what the code does now, without any interpretation of
> what may have been intended. This means that something like
>
> if (a)
>        b;
>        c;
>
> would become
> - if (a)
>     b;
> c;

Hi Andrew,
  I would do 1, and if you think that its wrong, add a comment email asking 
for double check.

Best Regards
 Alistair Leslie-Hughes

[Andrew Talbot]

Alistair Leslie-Hughes wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>   I would do 1, and if you think that its wrong, add a comment email
>   asking
> for double check.
>
> Best Regards
>  Alistair Leslie-Hughes

Sounds good. Thanks, Alistair!