Lines Matching refs:We

6 followed. We're not perfect. Please be polite where you notice these discrepancies
14 Being consistent makes code easier to understand. We've made an attempt to keep
22 vision for these tools. We're C developers and embedded software developers.
45 default. We believe that if you're working with a simple compiler and target,
52 Let's talk about naming things. Programming is all about naming things. We name
67 We want to read our code. This means we like names and flow that are more
68 naturally read. We try to avoid double negatives. We try to avoid cryptic
74 We like descriptive names for things, especially functions and variables.
77 longer than the average. Guilty. We're okay with a tiny bit more typing if it
90 naming. We find i, j, and k are better loop counters than loopCounterVar or
91 whatnot. We only break this rule when we see that more description could improve
97 We like consistency, but we're not really obsessed with it. We try to name our
118 We don't really want to add to the style battles out there. Tabs or spaces?
123 We've decided on our own style preferences. If you'd like to contribute to these
125 the same. It will only hurt a little. We promise.
131 power-of-2 number that looks decent on a wide screen. We have no more reason
132 than that. We break that rule when we have lines that wrap (macros or function
173 support old-school block comments. So that is what we're using. We apologize. We
181 one method! We'll keep it really brief!
187 nice power-of-2 number that really grooves with Ruby's compact style. We have no
188 more reason than that. We break that rule when we have lines that wrap. When
203 Egad. Really? We use markdown and we like pdf files because they can be made to