Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 15, 2022. It is now read-only.

Revisit Issue #10 > "Remove Trailing Whitespace" should not be on by default #43

Closed
ccoenen opened this issue Jul 23, 2014 · 6 comments
Closed

Comments

@ccoenen
Copy link
Contributor

ccoenen commented Jul 23, 2014

Since the issue has been closed, a lot of people have asked you to reconsider. Personally, i think that this issue has been closed too early.

Yes, trailing whitespace is not per se neccessary, but making changes to code just to conform to coding style is unneccessary, too. And in some cases (mentioned in #10 as well), this change can be destructive.

You're trying to prevent churn, and i get that. But you're creating churn with this, yourselves.

Then, there's people who don't use atom (gosh i know). I don't want to clean up other people's white space after them. Most certainly not incidentally.

martindale added a commit to martindale/whitespace that referenced this issue Sep 3, 2014
@wwoods
Copy link

wwoods commented Oct 1, 2014

See Issue #8. That sounds like your real issue.

@ccoenen
Copy link
Contributor Author

ccoenen commented Oct 1, 2014

Well, not exactly. The proposal in #8 is a lot better than the current default, but in general i'd really love to see a switch to something like editorconfig instead. (i suggested this in #10 as well)

@wwoods
Copy link

wwoods commented Oct 1, 2014

I see - editorconfig support for trailing whitespace does sound ideal in general, but I personally prefer that this plugin be left "on" by default and just do it properly. I may try to hack out a PR this weekend. It's a pretty upsetting problem. Just gotta actually put the time in to do it right..

@notslang
Copy link

See sindresorhus/atom-editorconfig#3 with regards to editorconfig

I don't want to clean up other people's white space after them. Most certainly not incidentally.

...add this to your config.cson if you don't want to do that:

'global':
  'whitespace':
    'removeTrailingWhitespace': false

Lastly, if you want #10 to be reopened, then go comment there... making duplicate issues isn't the way to go.

@ccoenen
Copy link
Contributor Author

ccoenen commented Mar 20, 2015

@slang800 Yes, i commented there as well. And i had the impression that the atom team does not discuss there since it was closed. So i opened an issue to get their attention back to the topic.

In case you missed it, I also created #59. Yes, i'm serious. Feel free to add your opinion there, too.

@winstliu
Copy link
Contributor

Let's keep the discussion over at #10 for now, regardless if it's closed.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants