standards

We have a massive, ancient codebase that needs a lot of cleanup. We have always had coding standards and everyone has always tried to follow them, but they were not enforced so over time a lot of violations have creeped in. Many of them are just whitespace issues, like using tabs instead of spaces, or spaces where there shouldn't be any, or missing spaces where they should be. We are going to start actively enforcing our coding standards to make sure more violations don't creep in, but it's difficult to enforce them in an automated way on only the changes, so it would be nice to clean up these

Will auto_ptr be deprecated in incoming C++ standard? Should unique_ptr be used for ownership transfer instead of shared_ptr? If unique_ptr is not in the standard, then do I need to use shared_ptr instead? David Rodríguez - dribeas UPDATE: This answer was written in 2010 and as anticipated std::auto_ptr has been deprecated. The advice is entirely valid. In C++0x std::auto_ptr will be deprecated in favor of std::unique_ptr . The choice of smart pointer will depend on your use case and your requirements, with std::unique_ptr with move semantics for single ownership that can be used inside

1. `` The Backtick defined in Kernel 1. a) %x{} Percent X < alternate syntax for The Backtick defined in parse.y, see discussion 2. system() Kernel#system 3. fork() Kernel#fork, Process#fork 4. open() open a pipe Kernel#open 4.a. IO.popen() < behaves the same as open() open a pipe IO#popen 4.b. open("|-") fork to a pipe 4.c. IO.popen("-") < behaves the same as open("|-") fork to a pipe see discussion 5. Open3.popen3() require 'open3' stdlib Open3 6. PTY.spawn() require 'pty' stdlib PTY 7. Shell.transact() require 'shell' stdlib Shell When should one forsake the trusty back-tick for one of the

How exactly does the standard define that, for example, float (*(*(&e)[10])())[5] declares a variable of type "reference to array of 10 pointer to function of () returning pointer to array of 5 float "? Inspired by discussion with @DanNissenbaum Joseph Mansfield I refer to the C++11 standard in this post Declarations Declarations of the type we're concerned with are known as simple-declaration s in the grammar of C++, which are of one of the following two forms (§7/1): decl-specifier-seq opt init-declarator-list opt ; attribute-specifier-seq decl-specifier-seq opt init-declarator-list ; The

Does it depend on the platform you are using, or is there a common convention that most developers suggest/follow? There are several options: id="someIdentifier"' - looks pretty consistent with javascript code. id="some-identifier" - looks more like html5-like attributes and other things in html. id="some_identifier" - looks pretty consistent with ruby code and is still a valid identifier inside of Javascript I was thinking #1 and #3 above make the most sense because they play nicer with Javascript. Is there a right answer to this? There isn't one. I use underscores all the time, due to