Why I prefer no tabs in source code
adamspiers.org
adamspiers.org
Tabs aren't just used at the beginning of lines. There might be a left-aligned, multi-line comment to the right of a block of code(...)
I cannot fathom what point he thinks he's making with these. If you're using tabs in a way that depends on tab width, you're doing it wrong.
Tab indentation generally means that one tab character is one layer of indenting. That's it. It's about semantic structure, not layout.
If you want to make ASCII art, or align things like paragraph-style comments, or "indent" things that aren't part of a block of code like pieces of a lengthy conditional clause split over multiple lines, use spaces instead (and then the five people who use proportional fonts will complain that using spaces for alignment "isn't portable"). Of course, if you're using a language with an off-side rule for syntactic whitespace even a die-hard tabber ought to just use spaces.
Personally, I dislike that sort of non-semantic formatting business in source code (and I think off-side rules in syntax are a horrible idea), but that's a matter of taste. And obviously, consistency is vastly more important than the particulars of indenting style. But I get tired of people arguing against tabs on the basis of not knowing how to use them properly.
On the other hand, this unintentionally makes a different, very strong argument in favor of using spaces: people can't manage to use tabs properly, so don't let them. This is why we can't have nice things, folks!
Just have guidelines and stick to them. What sucks is inconsistency.
Everybody's got an opinion about code layout. It doesn't matter. There's no good or bad layout. Readability is just another word for "looking like stuff I'm used to read".
Now whenever I read python code that is outside of PEP8 just a little bit, it makes me cringe, but I can still read other, non python code indented almost any way. Thought that was interesting.
Sure you'd need to know the standard occasionally but can't the code just load with my "stylesheet" and then use tabs. Then when it's saved the code is simply reverted to space delimits. This sort of formatting issue should not be an issue anymore surely?
2. Sometimes I use tabs. Sometimes I don't. I can never really remember, because Vim is set to :expandtab for me on some of my machines. What I do know is that I never really care.
I use the ^T, ^D, <<, >>, and = commands to shift my left margin around in Vim. I haven't typed a space or a tab at the beginning of a line in years. After all, why use low-level functions when you have high-level ones?
Oh yeah, and I'd rather GOTO label than BREAK.
Nearly every editor I've used allows you to adjust tab size. In my mind, that means tabs allow every user to set the width that they prefer.
I comment like this. It's also not hard to do. You type something like:
some line of code ; here is my comment, blah blah blah, very long, blah blah blah
some line of code ; here is my comment, blah blah
; blah, very long, blah blah blah
;; here is my comment, blah blah blah, very long,
;; blah blah blah
some line of code
"Or consider someone who is on an 80x25 terminal"... ok now where are just getting silly.
I always consider people on 80 column terminals, because although I have a huge monitor, I would like to display more than one file at a time. Aiming for 80 columns means that you appeal to the "lowest common denominator" and it means that you can have lots of files within easy visual reach. (I actually end up near 90 at home and 85 at work... but I try not to exceed 78 too often.)
Do you not people see these two twin (troll?) threads posted by the same person? Within the same minute?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1058196 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1058195
Someone went out of his way to find two trivial, but hot-button issues and submitted an argument for each. It's another "experiment".
If I came across an opposing view, I would typically submit it in a comment/reply, not start a separate thread. And if you look at the topic IDs, they were submitted right after the other (i.e. submitter knew of both sides before hand.)
That, and the triviality of the subject made be suspicious of the submitter's intentions. I didn't mean to be hurtful, but, for crying out loud ..
there are certain evergreen topics here that are always going to lead to heated debate. iphone versus android versus pre, mac versus windows versus linux, rails versus drupal versus php, ruby versus python versus c++ versus perl versus lisp, etc etc etc.
each time an article is posted here that takes a stand one way or the other, it prejudices the resultant discussion. it's sort of inherently understood that, if you want to comment strongly anti-iphone, you better wait until the posted article itself is also anti-iphone, or else you're going to face stiff opposition and downvotes.
by posting two articles, one pro-tab and one anti-tab, the submitter has neatly sidestepped that problem. if news.yc tilted strongly one way or the other, you'd expect one article or the other to get most of the upvotes, and the other one would sink. as it turns out, both articles have been running neck-and-neck for hours. interesting. it shows that tab lovers and haters exist here in equal proportions, which i really wouldn't have guessed.
Wouldn't a good thing to do in such a situation be to write an article of one's own summarizing the key points from both the pro and anti arguments, titling it something like "To tab or not to tab" and linking to that instead? That way you don't have to take a stand on a polarizing article but could get the benefit of the HN community's discussion?
HN usually has great discussion even on crummy topics and I can empathize with the intent to tap into such discussion on a subject of interest, but this dual posting (in my purely subjective opinion) has a whiff of deception about it - a "letter of the law" vs "spirit of the law" thing.
"by posting two articles, one pro-tab and one anti-tab, the submitter has neatly sidestepped that problem. "
Yes it is a neat hack. But I also agree with Mahmud in that this seems (somewhat) trollish.(What's next? Pairs of "Lisp is cool/ Lisp sucks" "Ruby is better than Python/Python is better than Ruby" articles? - Good on you for spotting it, Mahmud!)
A trollish hack? Why not?
if this hack started becoming common, I'm sure the editors would eventually put a stop to it.
I agree. I wasn't implying you did. Apologies if I gave that impression in my post.
" I'm just noting that this is a clever hack that illustrates a problem in the system."
I agree with this too. It is a clever hack(good) exploiting a hole in the system (ambiguous), intended specifically to provoke argument( bad imo).
Nothing could be further from the truth. I was hoping for (and got) intelligent, measured discussion from a lot of smart people on the history, merits, demerits, etc of both approaches. I felt (and still believe) there would have been less discussion without both articles being posted. As it is, the HN front page often features opposing viewpoints simultaneously, one often in response to the other. Submitting them together simply accelerated the process. It's more interesting than a poll ("Spaces or Tabs?") and FAR more interesting than me typing up a summary of both arguments and submitting that instead, as you suggested in an earlier comment.
the line between this and "argument" (used in the debating sense, not in the shout at each other sense) is very thin. The word to focus on is "provoke" not "argument". What makes it "argument" is that by setting up artificial poles opposed to each other simultaneously you are attempting a combative argument vs an exploratory one. That it didn't turn out that way is due to the strength of the HN community, which largely didn't take the bait. But bait in the water, there certainly was.
This is (imo) abuse of the system. Just do a thought experiment and imagine people submitting all kinds of paired posts (like you did) to get "intelligent measured responses" to their own questions - "Emacs is better than Vim"/ "Vim is better than Emacs", say. "Measured responses", sure!
HN would go to hell very fast if everone started looking for "measured responses" in this fashion. Quoting allenbrunson , "I'm just noting that this is a clever hack that illustrates a problem in the system.". It is clever. and it is abuse in that it takes advantage of a vulnerability in the system.
"I felt (and still believe) there would have been less discussion without both articles being posted."
yes this is the hack bit. And it works (as long as it is just the odd person doing this). Jumping a red light "works" too, if reducing the length of your trip is the only criterion.
"FAR more interesting than me typing up a summary of both arguments and submitting that instead, as you suggested in an earlier comment."
In other words you don't want to do any work up front but do want get people to argue each side of artificially paired posts. Hence the word "provoke".
As Allen said above, "if this hack started becoming common, I'm sure the editors would eventually put a stop to it."
In other words, it is only the rarity and novelty of this tactic that stops you from getting stomped on.
All that said, do what you will! If such abuse continues and spreads, the moderators will land on it with both feet.
Or you may indeed have found a superior method of topic submission and I am completely off base, in which case I'd expect the other participants on HN to copy your superior style of topic submission.
Signing off this thread,
Additionally, tabs are 8 spaces to the python interpreter. If you're not using 8 space tab stop, you're setting up people who use your code for a world of hurt if they ever change anything in your files.
And the reason why spaces are bad is because it makes subtle errors when they get mixed in with tab-indented code. This is an argument for consistency, not for using spaces.