[DonaldFisk]

We're disagreeing about the meanings of style vs. standards here. I'm using style in the commonly accepted sense, e.g. "hair stylist", "stylish", "all style and no substance."

Maximum function lengths and cyclomatic complexity are important but I'd put those under standards.

Lisp gives you a lot of flexibility regarding how you do things, but once you choose a way, that constrains how your code should be laid out, i.e. its style. EMACS indents code in the accepted Lisp style. It doesn't define it. It implements it.

Saying you should avoid eval at run time is a coding standard, not style.

[aidenn0]

> We're disagreeing about the meanings of style vs. standards here. I'm using style in the commonly accepted sense, e.g. "hair stylist", "stylish", "all style and no substance."

Indeed we are. I'm considering "style guide" as a noun phrase to include many things that you would call standards, and comes from the definition of style "a manner of doing something."