| 1 |
On Tue, 2004-04-13, 09:32:19 +0100, in |
| 2 |
<20040413083218.GC3292@g.o>, tigger@g.o wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 10:46:23AM +0200, Xavier Neys wrote: |
| 4 |
> > <tabs> are evil in the first place. The only sure way to obtain and |
| 5 |
> > keep a given number of spaces is to use spaces. Why isn't that |
| 6 |
> > obvious? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I think sejo was trying to request that we use tabs to format the XML |
| 9 |
source for better readability and maintainability, not that we use tabs |
| 10 |
to format the rendered document. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> s/<tabs> are evil/I don't like tabs therefore they suck/ |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Isn't that how it works? I don't want to use <foo>, therefore nobody |
| 15 |
else should use <foo>, either. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Tabs aren't designed to keep a given number of spaces, thats entirely |
| 18 |
> not the point. They are designed so that the number of spaces they |
| 19 |
> represent can be changed, and that is useful. I can see 4 |
| 20 |
> spaces-per-tab, and you can use 2, or whatever, without reformatting |
| 21 |
> the file. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Agreed. This is why various Gentoo policies have mandated the use of |
| 24 |
tabs for source formatting. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? |
| 28 |
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action. |
| 29 |
--Ghost in the Shell |
Archives