> After careful consideration and a bit of editing, I judge that it 
> should not be embarassing, illegal, job-threatening, or otherwise 
> dangerous for me to
> post the following section of the company C style guide.

Except for some details I think its as good as you can expect from a
compromise. It even enforces my favourite {} layout style!

One thing that is partly missing: I think every rule should include a
pointer to the judge who can authorize deviations. Maybe this rule set
should not be interpreted that hard, but while working for a space
company I was very enthousiastic about the fact the even though the
rules were often very strict, you could always get around them (with
permission!) if your reason was good enough (that is, of course, as
perceived by the judge!).

Some let's formulate Wouter's rule about (company) standards: Never
deploy a mandatory standard without a mechanism for authorizing
exceptions. This of course forces you to think about why the standard
exists in the first place (in the end of course: company profit), for
that is the guide for judging deviations.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: www.voti.nl/hvu
 

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist