Ye. This is agile deep down removing the fun from programming with all its toxic processes. Programmers are the worst when it comes to forcing their dogmatic believes on others.
This, I really don't get why people want to enforce uniformity, a room filled with people with exactly the same accent is a boring room. Most teams I've worked on slowly converge to a "house style" in any case, and if you're on the team, your personal preferences are a part of that. Not some committee.
"I really don't get why people want to enforce uniformity"
This is engineering, not food choice or movie accents. I don't want your second style in my code for the same reason that if my physical project uses metric tooling, I don't want the intern to come screaming in with imperial tooling, and then get huffy when I complain and ask them to recast their work in metric. Yes, it's true, there's absolutely nothing your imperial tooling can't do... but I still don't want it in my engineering for no benefit.
Engineering innovation is not harmed by being pushed above the basic level of which kind of tooling it uses.
I wonder how many people complaining are actually routine Go programmers. These rules are pretty sensible and clearly written by an experienced Go programmer. To the extent that my code would be modified by this tool, it isn't much. Many of the rules are just unsightly in Go code in practice and many of them I've already wondered why gofmt doesn't already have. For instance, the rule around newlines and brackets; I've often accidentally had a function end with a newline, but it never looks good, it's never something I'm like yes, let me fight for this and I've manually removed it as soon as I've seen it. If someone on my team really went to bat against these rules (and note the "really went to bat", I'm not talking quibbles here & there, we've all got those) I'd have questions about their ability to do basic cost/benefit analysis in such a process.
And, if it isn't engineering, then by all means go nuts with whatever you like. But I think your question only has meaning in a group context, because if you're not in a group context, who cares in the slightest what the non-existent group thinks? I've got plenty of personal projects that I in my own engineering role wouldn't consider to pass even basic engineering muster. You should see my electrical "engineering" work; I would feel dirty if I didn't scare quote the term "engineering". I'm not very good. Tends to look more like a hollywood bomb than anything you see linked in the sort of YouTube video that shows up on HN every so often.
It depends on the formatter you're using. If it's strict about line width you'll end up with a lot of noise in the diffs. Prettier will re-format single-line lists that goes one character over the threshold and then re-condense them once it's able to fit under that threshold. It's not uncommon for a change that adds three classes to three different elements to become a 20 line diff.
Otherwise people sharing that criteria will never fix minor code style issues because "it was that way before, and it's such a minor thing, and it makes my merge harder, please accept the review and ship it don't be unreasonable", and of course we are "reasonable" and end up with thousands of "minor things" over time and the more there are the more people feel it's fine to leave shit in, the less comfortable they feel with the code until eventually they all quit and leave the mess to someone else.
I don't even want to imagine how bad the shitshow is going to get as AI coding assistants gain marketshare.
gofmt's normalization of code formatters was the single greatest achievement Go has to its name, and Prettier was a clear improvement on it. If fixing this crap is bothering anyone's laziness or their artistic sentimentalities then they better get to solving the issue where we're still storing code in source control instead of ASTs and letting the editors render them however the user wants.
I agree with this 100%. I would extend it by saying that one you make formatting mandatory, the rules themselves don't matter, as long as they are the same for everyone on the project.
One could also make formatting automatic through git hooks and then every one can override their local formatting rules to their liking without breaking the common rules.
Eventually you realize that what's really needed is AST-based semantic revision control. Text is a lowest common denominator that all programming tools should go beyond, not just the compilers.
Take PEP8 for example which is Python specific. PEP8 has a rule that code shall not exceed 79 characters. This has the added benefit that on a standard 1080 monitor you can see two Python files side by side without horizontal scrolling. This also has the added benefit of being able to see code diffs without issue.
I can see why certain choices are made but only matter if they have sound reasoning and arguments for them.
You really want to argue that shrinking font from a standard font size will produce legible text like that?
The argument is against super long lines. I think Clean Code suggests something similar to the effect of if you have more than three arguments for a method you are better served taking a class as the argument.
