- no lonely braces on a single line, except:
- when a namespace, or a proc larger then 24 lines (buh) ends, or
- for delimiting data
- braces in if {expr} only when it is an expression
- braces around arguments only if there are more then one
- rather return, continue, break then else
- don't while, foreach, for, if you can avoid it - recurse
Illustrating with an example:
proc ccfs param { if !$param return puts "we are in" if [llength $param] {puts "and we've got a list"} switch -- [lindex $param] { stop {return} continue { # test the second parameter set test [lindex $param 1]} default {puts "don't know what todo with: $param}}} if {$test eq "stop"} { puts "we stopped on the second param"}}Observations:
- If a line is empty, it clearly denotes that something new is going to happen.
- Of course I use a syntax aware editor to get the indenting and the parent matching right
- Conditional are: either flags - $var, results - script, or expressions - {expr}, which is visually conveyed by the CCFS
- Some say (A question of style) that run time is slightly longer; I don't care! (If you need it fast, postprocess the code to insert the braces).
Mhm.. if/then/else is bad, however, sometimes we need it though. If an if/else branch is too long to fit into the same line, you have to decide upon formatting. What about?
Traditional CCFS 1: tame CCFS 2: else = } { CCFS 3: wild you might spare on more line i like this one if '..else..' is short it gets the } out of sight if {cond} { if {cond} { if {cond} { if {cond} { ..then.. ..then.. ..then.. ..then.. } \ } else { } else { } { else { ..else.. ..else..} ..else..} ..else..} } continuation.. continuation.. continuation.. continuation..
Here is some real code, cut&paste from ttp.tcl from TTP. Please don't try to understand the code, just skim over the text to see the syntactic patterns:
CCFS extreme example of standard syntax ..inside a namespace... proc tcl {args} { proc tcl {args} { variable state variable state if [llength $args] { if {[llength $args]} { switch $state { switch $state { parse {set state tclline}} parse { catch {eval $args} result set state tclline return $result } } else { } switch $state { catch {eval $args} result parse {set state tclstart} return $result tcl {set state tclend}}} } else { return} switch $state { parse { # cmd: preprocess lines instead of subst set state tclstart proc cmd {args} { } variable state tcl { variable cmdLine set state tclend switch $state { } parse { } set cmdLine $args } set state cmdstart}}} return } namespace export out parse skipline -- literal tcl cmd } # cmd: preprocess lines instead of subst proc cmd {args} { namespace import ::ttp::* variable state variable cmdLine proc stamp {} { switch $state { set host "" parse { if [info exists ::env(HOST)] {set host $::env(HOST)} set cmdLine $args if [info exists ::env(HOSTNAME)] {set host $::env(HOSTNAME)} ............... if {$host eq ""} {catch {exec hostname} host} } ...the procedure continues here... }
Loops'for' and 'while' use expressions for iteration, however for reasons explained elsewhere you must enclose the expression within braces, which is ugly. Use the intrinsic list processing of the Tcl 'proc' instead. The command line parser of TTP is an example for this. Iff:
- the iteration is not very deep
- does not get called all the time
proc printlist args { while {[llength $args]} { puts [lindex $args 0] set args [lreplace $args 0 0]}}Good looking:
proc printlist {item args} { puts $item if [llength $args] {eval printlist $args}}Of course this is a very constructed example since the following is the way to do it:
proc printlist args {foreach item $args {puts $item}}However i hope to illustrate the point of using 'proc' and 'args' for list iteration. For counting stuff consider:
proc forloop i { if $i {puts $i; forloop [incr i -1]}}Oh.. this counts down and stops with '1'! Ahem, does that really matter? Yes! Then use:
proc forloop {i n} { if $n {puts $i; forloop [incr i 1] [incr n -1]}}See Tail call optimization for more on recursion and: program language specialists please jump in.LEG
RLH That code is hard to read. Much more so than regular Tcl syntax style.jcw - Check out an indentation syntax for Tcl ...LEG - in fact i read that before making up this page. an indentation syntax for Tcl however changes the syntactic rules, CCFS does not. I was rather inspired by Lisp than Python. However i would like to see a back-and-forth code reformatter between CCFS and standard Tcl Syntax: would your programm be the right tool to take as a start?