I’ve seen C code written that way–I hate it…
sribe
Qqwy
TypeCheck Core Team
Funnily enough, in Elm the formatter is the one who usually rewrites my trailing commas to leading commas.
Actually, it would be nice if the formatter could get an option to keep trailing commas alone (and potentially add them to lists that span multiple lines automatically), although personally I do not have a very strong opinion about this issue at all.
1
joeerl
Creator of Erlang - Fondly Remembered
I hate trailing commas
You want me to write foo(a,b,) for a function call?
No I want to write foo(a,b) - like I was taught way back in tiny school
7
NobbZ
As long as the call, list, map, whatever fits on a single line, yes, you are totally right.
But if it gets that long, that we break over multiple lines, then I prefer to have a trailing comma.
6
hauleth
In case of the single line functions it really doesn’t make sense to write foo(a, b,) over foo(a, b), but in multiline function calls it became quite handful, as:
foo(
a,
b,
)
IMHO looks more consistent than:
foo(
a,
b
)
And also it result s in cleaner in diffs in tools like Git and is easier for tools like Darcs/Pijul (which operates on on diffs/graggles).
6
aenglisc
I like not having an extra thing in mind while editing configs/deps or whatnot so personally I find trailing commas lovely. Sadly, the formatter disagrees.
4
OvermindDL1
No trailing comma’s on single lines, it’s for multiple lines only, like this is fine:
[1, 2, 3, 4]
But this would be weird:
[1, 2, 3, 4, ]
However for multiple lines:
[
1,
2,
3,
4,
]
That means that you can add and remove (potentially long) elements with a minimal git diff, you can rearrange without worrying about adding/removing comma’s, etc… etc… It all ‘just works’.
6
cmkarlsson
Why commas at all?
[1 2 3 4]
[
1
2
3
4
]
foo(a b) # Although the paranthesis might want to move to the left (foo a b)
0
OvermindDL1
Lol, well in ML languages no commas is Application, so that would be ambiguous (How would you handle [blah 1 2 3 4], where do the arguments to blah end and the list begin or do more things apply to the return value of blah/N or…?), in Elixir it would be more possible on an initial though but I don’t doubt there are ambiguous things around that too. ^.^
0