Although I like the look of the * comments, I agree with Andrei here -- we should not be putting requirements for people's editors into the style doc.? People are so attached to their editors, that I doubt the style guide would win that battle :)


I would change my request to be more of a suggestion that comments be easily distinguishable from normal code without syntax highlighting.? This means making the comment tags be distinguishable from the comment itself, whether by indentation or by making them larger.


I'd also suggest that if we do allow a hybrid of commenting styles, that the same file contains a consistent style.? That means if you edit a file that has a comment style you don't use, you should change your added code to match the style of the file.

-Steve



----- Original Message -----
> From:Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei at erdani.com>
> To:Discuss the phobos library for D <phobos at puremagic.com>
> Cc:
> Sent:Thursday, March 31, 2011 11:37 AM
> Subject:Re: [phobos] Initial Phobos style guide proposal
> 
> On 3/31/11 10:13 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> > I sugest people start using an editor that handles the *'s
> automatically.
> 
> Mine does, but in past discussions people have complained about overly specific requirements for editor capabilities.
> 
> Andrei
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos