Charlie Gordon said:

> "Richard Heathfield" <rjh@see.sig.invalid> a écrit dans le message de
> news: fMydnRETGIuBUJLanZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@bt.com...
>> Mark McIntyre said:
>>
<snip>
>>> If someone isn't open to having their mindset changed by
>>> others, then they're probably useless as an employee. Imagine if you
>>> hired someone who refused point blank to change to your in-house
>>> coding standard, or to use your in-house libraries....
>>
>> The trick is to review the coding standard during your first day, and
>> come up with a long list of proposed changes (which, naturally, you will
>> be prepared to justify). Once you've won that battle, you can start in
>> on reviewing the in-house libraries. :-)
>
> I would be very interested to see your coding standard.

No, you wouldn't. :-) Seriously, I don't have one, in the formal document
sense. Never saw the point.

On site one can't, diplomatically speaking, get away with "your coding
standard is rubbish, use this instead" on one's first day, whereas one
very often /can/ get away with "your coding standard makes for an
interesting read, but I've identified the following problems with it, and
I've added explanations of why they are problems, along with suggested
solutions, what do you think?". So the modifications that one suggests
will differ from site to site, making a single master document less useful
than it might otherwise be.

And for my own code, my coding standard is of course in my head. Is it
worth writing down? Maybe, maybe not.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999