- From: <jonathan@garbee.me>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:30:42 -0400
- To: <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <133b21ab17f617c847b9bd7654322324@garbee.me>
I don't think it is being too meticulous at all. We need a common style guide for any type of code examples we allow that way everything is consistent. Also, we need them while we are going through cleaning everything up so we can do that along the way compared to going back and doing it. It came up in the IRC a few days ago so we decided to use jQuery's until the community came up with exactly what we would want. So perhaps taking that and expanding upon it with anything we need extra? -Garbee On 17.10.2012 04:18pm, Pete L. wrote: > Not sure if we'd be creating "yet another style guide" or not. Sure, it's easy to find "JavaScript style guides", such as the following: > http://docs.jquery.com/JQuery_Core_Style_Guidelines [2] > http://dojotoolkit.org/community/styleGuide [3] > http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/javascriptguide.xml [4] > https://github.com/rwldrn/idiomatic.js [5] > However, these guides are focused on writing re-usable, maintainable, proper production JavaScript application code. Our goal is somewhat different. For instance, none of the above guides has anything to say on the subject of denoting evaluated JS (see my earlier post). > Additionally, none of the guides denote a common set of reusable variable names. For instance, refer back to the MDN Values, Variables, and Literals page: > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/Guide/Values,_variables,_and_literals [6] > The first example uses the variable "answer", the second uses "x" and "y" then it goes on to use "a", "b", "input", "myArray", "n", "myvar", "prefix", "f", "g", "coffees", "fish", "myList", "Sales", "car", "foo", "quote", "home", "str", and then "x" again. My point is that there isn't even a consistant capitalization style here, much less a common set of standard variables. I don't know that this really matters in the long run, but I think it goes towards consistency to use similar "throwaway variables" across all example code. > I guess the DOJO guide goes into class naming conventions, but it's more oriented towards substantial code-bases than short snippets of example code. > So, what I'm thinking is not necessarily a style guide that talks about things like the use of "===" vs. "==", or the use of single-quotes vs. double-quotes. Those can be addressed by selecting an existing guide from one of those above (my vote is for jQuery's, as it's short, simple, and to the point). However, I think that we should supplement with a guide on variable naming, expression-value commenting, and anything else we determine should be addressed specifically to bring consistency to example code. > Maybe I'm being a bit to anal-retentive and/or dictatorial here. > -Pete > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com [7]> wrote: > >> On 10/17/12 2:28 PM, "Andrew Rowls" <eternicode@gmail.com [1]> wrote: >> >> >> TBH, It's unenforceable unless there's proper tooling. I'd leave it >> >> open and have a page discussing the various styles pros and cons. >> > >> >Though technically unenforceable (for now?), I think it would still be >> >beneficial to have official guidelines to point people to. A discussion >> >on pros and cons is well and good, but flavor-of-the-week style in >> >examples would just be confusing. Better to have a little official >> >consistency and something to back it up than to have no consistency. >> >> Fair enough. >> >> >> I strongly favor vi, here. >> > >> >When did this become about editors? :P >> >> :D >> >> --tobie Links: ------ [1] mailto:eternicode@gmail.com [2] http://docs.jquery.com/JQuery_Core_Style_Guidelines [3] http://dojotoolkit.org/community/styleGuide [4] http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/javascriptguide.xml [5] https://github.com/rwldrn/idiomatic.js [6] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript/Guide/Values,_variables,_and_literals [7] mailto:tobie@fb.com
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 20:31:05 UTC