Some comment to the post suggesting looking at the Google C++ guidelines. Detailed discussion about some aspects of these guidelines are posted at comp.lang.c++.moderated.
Some weird or controversial points include:
We don't believe that the available
alternatives to exceptions, such as
error codes and assertions, introduce
a significant burden.
As if assertions were a viable alternative... Assertions are usually for programming errors and situations that should never happen, while exceptions can happen (are somewhat anticipated) in the execution flow.
Reference Arguments: All parameters
passed by reference must be labeled
const. ... In fact it is a very strong
convention that input arguments are
values or const references while
output arguments are pointers.
No comment, about weasel phrase a very strong convention.
Doing Work in Constructors: Do only
trivial initialization in a
constructor. If at all possible, use
an Init() method for non-trivial
initialization. ... If your object
requires non-trivial initialization,
consider having an explicit Init()
method and/or adding a member flag
that indicates whether the object was
successfully initialized.
Yes... 2-phase init to make things simpler... What if I have const fields? This rule is probably the effect of attitude towards exceptions.
Use streams only for logging
Which streams? IOStreams, standard C streams, other?
On one hand they advise to use macros only in exceptional situations, while they recommend using DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN to prohibit copy/assign. They could have advised the approach with special class (like in Boost)
Do not overload operators except in rare, special circumstances.
What about assignment, or arithmetic operators for numeric calculations, etc?
Default parameters are more difficult to maintain because copy-and-
paste from previous code may not reveal all the parameters. Copy-and-
pasting of code segments can cause major problems when the default
arguments are not appropriate for the new code.
The what? Copy/paste from previous code?
Remember that reading any of the guidelines can introduce a bias to your way of thinking. And sometimes it won't be beneficial for you or your code. I agree with some other posts advising reading good books by good authors beforehand. When you have sufficient amount of knowledge, then you are able to look at the guidelines and find good and weak points easily, without creating a mess in your brain ;)