I would also be happy with this format (which scales better in diffs of one-line changes):
C(int x, int y, int z)
: x{x}
, y{y}
, z{z}
{
}
But generally we all accept any of these styles, have done in the past and will continue to in future. Strictly enforcing a single style in the guide is not realistic or helpful. Frankly my favourite parts of the style guide are guidelines Google wrote in there originally and mir-team has deleted, so we're never going to totally agree.
P.S. 'x{x}' doesn't work in some cases such as explicit constructors so any examples should also admit that sometimes you need to use 'w(a,b,c)' where 'w{a,b,c}' is invalid.
I would also be happy with this format (which scales better in diffs of one-line changes):
C(int x, int y, int z)
: x{x}
, y{y}
, z{z}
{
}
But generally we all accept any of these styles, have done in the past and will continue to in future. Strictly enforcing a single style in the guide is not realistic or helpful. Frankly my favourite parts of the style guide are guidelines Google wrote in there originally and mir-team has deleted, so we're never going to totally agree.
P.S. 'x{x}' doesn't work in some cases such as explicit constructors so any examples should also admit that sometimes you need to use 'w(a,b,c)' where 'w{a,b,c}' is invalid.