[opk]

I long ago concluded that trying to line stuff up in columns like this in code is a mistake. It often results in realignment of blocks for small changes so what should be a small diff in the git history ends up being big.

Only rarely is the vertical alignment useful because mostly code isn't read vertically. Used in moderation, the reverse Christmas tree style used in the Linux kernel can be as good for readability (sorted longest to shortest). For some constant structures a reordering of fields to put the variable length element at the end of the line removes the need for padding space (like in the output of `ls -l` where filenames come last).

A common indentation style for continuation lines is to align with the start of arguments to the function. I've never seen the sense of this variable amount where indentation after a while is much more than after an if. Double the normal indentation for continuation works well in languages where line continuation isn't otherwise distinct from normal blocks.

[crispyambulance]

> ... trying to line stuff up in columns like this in code is a mistake.

I've encountered this sentiment more than a few times and I find it hard to accept. It totally makes sense to align repetitive stuff in columns. That's why people use tables in other contexts, and code should be no different. This alignment makes clear any deviations from the norm and lets you "see" the structure of the data easily.

It doesn't matter for minor stuff and, usually, the code linter/formatter is "good enough"-- but sometimes, you REALLY want to have columnar layout!

[rocqua]

The value of alignment (at least for me) is not in making the text of the code more readable. Instead, the value is communicating the structure of the code.

Seeing the same shape repeatedly tells me a lot about what is happening. It also helps highlight changes between two lines that are very similar.

[galaxyLogic]

> the value is communicating the structure of the code.

I agree and I think that is the same thing as code-readability. Code-readability means you can easily understand the code.

I personally try to abide by what I call "hedge" formatting convention, the punctuation forms a vertical hedge which then shows the structure of your code clearly:

[ a

, b

, c

]

Moving my eyes down to look for the closing bracket is easier (to me) than moving my eyes from left to right to spot it somewhere on the right side of the page.

Note how above ALL the punctuation is in the same (first) column, Having read that it then becomes easier to read what is on the rest of the columns.

In general it helps when things that are the same, or have the same purpose, on each line are in the same horizontal position. It is is then easier to see what is different about each line, since it is easy to see what is the same.

[ako]

I stopped manually formatting code long ago, just accept what the code formatter tool decides is good enough. Saves a lot of time.

[sverhagen]

In circumstances, and depending on configuration, the code formatter tool may still aim for alignment, such as assignment operators on subsequent lines. Whether you like that or not, for me the question still stands: how does that jive with "almost monospaced".

[GoblinSlayer]

I just put stuff on one line and let the editor wrap them. Doesn't waste vertical space, compatible with any font, any size, any window width, any form factor, the best from all worlds.

[thaumasiotes]

> I long ago concluded that trying to line stuff up in columns like this in code is a mistake. It often results in realignment of blocks for small changes so what should be a small diff in the git history ends up being big.

Seems wrongheaded to me; that's the same reason Elm wanted you to write arrays like this:

    [item1
     ,item2
     ,item3
     ,item4
    ]

instead of a sane way. It means adding or removing an element only changes one line in the diff!

Who cares? It's not hard to understand what's happening in a diff that makes this kind of change. You want the code to be easy to read, not easy to diff.

You could also easily base your diff algorithm on a lexer for the language rather than a lexer for ascii, in which case changing the amount of whitespace would register as "not a change".

[madsohm]

Many languages also support a comma after the last item, meaning you can still have one line diffs and have a sane reading structure:

    [
      item1,
      item2,
      item3,
      item4,
    ]

[vore]

Leading comma is better at resolving textual 3-way merges, e.g.:

   [ a         [ a       [ a
   , b         , b    /  , b
   , c   -->   , c   /   , c
   , d         , d  /    , dd
   ]           , e       ]
               ]

Your usual 3 way merge algorithm will correctly deduce:

   [ a
   , b
   , c
   , dd
   , e
   ]

Contrast this with trailing comma:

   [ a,         [ a,       [ a,
     b,           b,    /    b,
     c,   -->     c,   /     c,
     d            d,  /      dd
   ]              e        ]
                ]

You now have a merge conflict between "d," and "dd".

However, if you were to require a trailing comma after the final element you wouldn't have this problem.

[mikojan]

This looks bad. Haskell is much better:

  [ item1
  , item2
  , item3
  , item4
  ]

[andai]

This just seems like a limitation of the technology. When you change the width of one column, the whole table should realign, without any changes to those parts of the file (it's just about how it's displayed).

I recall reading something about "tab stops" that solved this problem, but I don't think there are any mainstream implementations of it.

[archseer]

I think you mean elastic tab stops https://nickgravgaard.com/elastic-tabstops/

[Rafert]

Tab stops are called out in the footnotes:

> Never attempt to line up text by using spaces. The only exception is if you are using a monospaced font. But in word processing applications, there are appropriate tools available for lining up text, like tables[1] and tab stops[2].

[1]: https://practicaltypography.com/tables.html [2]: https://practicaltypography.com/tabs-and-tab-stops.html

[mmis1000]

tab stops is still available in terminals. Tab in terminal move the cursor to next x*8(depends on setting) position independent of what character you input before.

But a major flaw is that it only works when your cell has less than 8 characters. Or it will go to the wrong stop. Which isn't that common today.

Because why insist in short names and 80 width character limit? Almost everyone have a screen that can fit hundreds of characters per line today.

[throwaway290]

Writing programs by manipulating text is the actual limitation of the technology here, alignment is just a minor detail by comparison.

[hnbad]

Arguably another problem with lining up code like in the example is that it emphasizes the relationship between the keys and between the values rather than between each key-value pair. This may be useful when writing out matrices but in the example of an object/dict with key-value pairs it seems a distraction more than an affordance.