[erlang-questions] Controversial subject of the day: tabs and spaces for indentation
Fri Feb 7 07:32:12 CET 2014
Would it be correct to say that this solution trades the possibilities
of user configurable tab width when available, for the certainty of
being able to use even those programs that have a hard coded tab width?
On Fri, 2014-02-07 at 13:04 +1300, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> On 6/02/2014, at 8:36 PM, Bengt Kleberg wrote:
> > The use of one tab for one level of indention is logical. The indention
> > level is 1, so why have another amount of characters? The only reason I
> > have heard for X =/= 1 is that 1 space is too narrow. So, use 1 tab. All
> > editors that I use can make 1 tab take up whatever width I like for
> > indentation.
> Sadly, there are tools other than editors.
> Having to hunt them down, trying to reconfigure them ALL,
> and failing, is why I refuse to mess with the defaults.
> Sadly, there are more editors out there than vi(m) and (x)emacs,
> and they do not all understand each other's way of recording the
> tab width. (Did anyone out there ever have to deal with code
> written using VED? Or Macintosh editors that kept info like that
> in resource forks?)
> I owe you people a debt of thanks.
> My text editor now has a quick-and-easy "untabify buffer" command.
> I wouldn't have bothered without this thread.
More information about the erlang-questions