@Kuba With respect to this comment... are you referring to a case like this:

reallyLongFunctionName[
  firstReallyLongArgument
, secondReallyLongArgument
]

If so, I indent the first argument with just two spaces. As you can see from the example, I do not indent the comma or closing bracket in my alien coding style. I tend to work in code blocks all the time so I am not fighting the automatic indenter.

If the WL parser allowed it, I would probably prefer to write something like this:

reallyLongFunctionName
  [ firstReallyLongArgument
  , secondReallyLongArgument
  ]

This is very SQL-esque, from which I stole my unorthodox indentation.

I really wish Mathematica allowed trailing commas right before a closing bracket

it would make things like this way simpler

@WReach thanks, since I work partially in IntelliJ I often use additional indentation:

reallyLongFunctionName[
      firstReallyLongArgument
    , secondReallyLongArgument
]

@WReach yours is probably cleaner by I find nested expression not scannable with commas at the same level as brackets and only two spaces here and there

@WReach another question, assuming reallyLonFunctionName is prepended with ;, this is what seems to be consistent:

; reallyLongFunctionName[
      firstReallyLongArgument
    , secondReallyLongArgument
  ]

notice indented ]. RIght?

Have to go, will be back later, thanks for tips anyway :)

@Kuba Yes, that is how I would indent it too.

The extra indentation between the brackets looks good too. My WL style has evolved to omit it because I find that the indentation can sometimes get out of control and code starts crawling off of the right hand side of the page. A lot of the SQL community came to the same conclusion as well, and often do not add the extra spacing between brackets. Of course, a lot of this is a matter of taste.

Hey guys, this is a sad story. Found it on Hacker News: Looking for Work after 25 Years of Octave.

Don't forget to take a look at the comments on HN.