The complex and consequential antitrust trial against Google and its search engine practices recently heard its closing arguments, and the tech giant is already planning to appeal. In a post made on X, Google confirmed it would file an appeal, explai

The complex and consequential antitrust trial against Google and its search engine practices recently heard its closing arguments, and the tech giant is already planning to appeal. In a post made on X, Google confirmed it would file an appeal, explaining that the proposed solutions went too far and "would harm consumers." “We will wait for the Court’s opinion,” Google wrote. “And we still strongly believe the Court’s original decision was wrong, and look forward to our eventual appeal.” To challenge Google's dominance of the search engine market, the Department of Justice took on the tech giant by filing a lawsuit back in 2020. The monumental antitrust case has steadily evolved over the years, with the DOJ proposing remedies like Google opening up its search engine tech to licensing, prohibiting agreements with device makers like Apple and Samsung to ensure Google was the default search engine and forcing the sale of the Chrome browser and the open-source Chromium project.  According to Google, the Department of Justice's proposed actions would open consumers up to "very real privacy issues," leave the government in charge of user data and help "well-funded competitors." Instead, Google offered to loosen its agreements to allow other search engines on devices and create an oversight committee to monitor the company's activities. Since then, the federal judge presiding over the case, Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, ruled in August 2024 that Google had an illegal monopoly of the search engine market. The judge agreed with the DOJ that Google owning the Chrome browser gives it an unfair advantage since it could use its search engine advantage to drive more traffic and generate more revenue for the company.  The end result of this antitrust trial could have serious implications for the future of AI, which is closely tied to the search engine market. According to Google, this ruling could allow other companies with AI chatbots to step in and dominate the search engine market instead. During the trial, Nick Turley, an OpenAI executive, testified that the company would be interested in buying Chrome if Google was forced to sell it.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/google-plans-to-appeal-the-antitrust-ruling-against-its-search-engine-dominance-171748836.html?src=rss

A U.S. trade court ruled that President Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs were illegal on Wednesday, but the administration has been granted a temporary stay until arguments are filed.Tariffs could affect iPhone prices in the fallThe Trump administration implemented wide-ranging and incredibly high tariffs throughout its initial weeks of being in power. After a lot of back and forth, exemptions, threats of new tariffs, and a lot of uncertainty, the madness seemed to be ending thanks to a U.S. trade court ruling.That respite was short-lived, however, as CNBC reports that an appeals court has stayed the permanent injunction until June 9. That's the deadline for both parties to file arguments about the case, and the courts will then decide if a longer stay is in order during appeal. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

The European Commission has published its full Digital Markets Act (DMA) decision against Apple, and it’s far, far worse than anybody expected. The Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, has accepted absolutely none of Apple’s arguments against being fined, and the decision threatens yet more existential damage to the company. Apple isn’t winning the argument, and, right or wrong, the decision has fangs. Huge fines, big threats Europe announced in April that it would fine Apple an eye-popping €500 million for noncompliance with the DMA, giving Apple 60 days to comply with its decision. One month later, the Commission published the full ruling against Apple, which details that changes the company made to its App Store rules did not go far enough to bring it into compliance. The decision warns that Apple is subject to additional periodic fines in the future if it fails to comply with the Commission’s strict interpretation of the DMA, no matter how inherently punitive some of its demands may be. (Can anyone else spell “tariffs”?) We’ll know soon enough if there are to be wider consequences to Europe’s demands. Apple now has 30 days to fully comply with the DMA (in Europe’s opinion) or face additional fines. The act itself came into force in November 2022 and began to be implemented against companies defined as ‘gatekeepers’ in 2023. The intention is to stop Apple and others from using their market position to impose anticompetitive limitations on developers.  Who is steering? The big bugbear relates to Apple’s anti-steering restrictions, which prevent developers from telling customers they can purchase services outside the App Store. The DMA demands that Apple let developers offer this option, which Apple does, but Europe argues that the limitations the company makes on doing so are not in compliance with the law. Europe also says Apple’s existing restrictions, fees, and technical limitations undermine the effectiveness of the DMA. That seems to mean Apple cannot charge a commission and cannot warn users of the consequences they face when shopping outside the App Store.  The Commission even plays dumb to the potential significance of permitting developers to link out to any website from within their apps, rather than being constrained to approved (and secure) sites. It says Apple has provided insufficient justification for this restriction and also wants Apple to remove messages warning users when they are about to make a transaction outside the App Store.  That’s going to be particularly pleasing to fraudsters, who may now attempt to create fake payment portals that look like reputable ones. Apple prevented $2 billion in fraud last year, the company has confirmed. Perhaps once the first big frauds take place, the EU may catch up to the online risks we all know exist. While I understand the original aim of Europe’s Digital Markets Act, the demands the Commission is making of Apple appear to go far beyond the original objective, which was to open up Apple’s platforms to competition.  The decisions now open Apple’s platform up to competitors.  There is a difference between the two, and, as described, it means Apple must now create and manage its platforms while permitting competitors to profit from those platforms at little or no cost. Apple rejects Europe Apple will fight in Europe.  “There is nothing in the 70-page decision released today that justifies the European Commission’s targeted actions against Apple, which threaten the privacy and security of our users in Europe and force us to give away our technology for free,” the company said. “Their decision and unprecedented fine came after the Commission continuously moved the goalposts on compliance, and repeatedly blocked Apple’s months-long efforts to implement a new solution. The decision is bad for innovation, bad for competition, bad for our products, and bad for users. While we appeal, we’ll continue engaging with the Commission to advocate on behalf of our European customers.” When the fine was initially revealed, the company also said:  “Today’s announcements are yet another example of the European Commission unfairly targeting Apple in a series of decisions that are bad for the privacy and security of our users, bad for products, and force us to give away our technology for free. We have spent hundreds of thousands of engineering hours and made dozens of changes to comply with this law, none of which our users have asked for. Despite countless meetings, the Commission continues to move the goal posts every step of the way.” My take?  Far from saving Europe’s tech industry, the manner in which the DMA is being applied will make the region even less relevant. Lacking a significant platform of its own, Europe’s approach will reduce choice and increase insecurity. As the clear first target of the DMA, Apple will inevitably be forced to increase prices, charge developers more for access to its developer tools, and will I think simply stop selling some products and services in Europe, rather than threaten customer security. We know it can do this because it has done so before. Fundamentally, of course, the big question remains unaddressed: How much profit it is legitimate to make on any product or service? I imagine the European Commission doesn’t want to go near a question as fundamental to capitalist wealth extraction as that. Can you imagine the collapse in executive bonuses that would follow a decision to define what the maximum profit made in any business transaction should be? Lobbyists across the political spectrum would be appalled — that extra profit pays for their meals. Looking to the extent to which the current application of the DMA seems to favor Apple’s biggest competitors, I can’t help but imagine it’s been paying for a few European meals already. Nice work, if you can get it.  You can follow me on social media! Join me on BlueSky,  LinkedIn, Mastodon, and MeWe.

Every few weeks, it seems like there’s a new headline about a lawyer getting in trouble for submitting filings containing, in the words of one judge, “bogus AI-generated research.” The details vary, but the throughline is the same: an attorney turns to a large language model (LLM) like ChatGPT to help them with legal research (or worse, writing), the LLM hallucinates cases that don’t exist, and the lawyer is none the wiser until the judge or opposing counsel points out their mistake. In some cases, including an aviation lawsuit from 2023, attorneys have had to pay fines for submitting filings with AI-generated hallucinations. So why haven’t they stopped?The answer mostly comes down to time crunches, and the way AI has crept into nearly every profession. Legal research databases like LexisNexis and Westlaw have AI integrations now. For lawyers juggling big caseloads, AI can seem like an incredibly efficient assistant. Most lawyers aren’t necessarily using ChatGPT to write their filings, but they are increasingly using it and other LLMs for research. Yet many of these lawyers, like much of the public, don’t understand exactly what LLMs are or how they work. One attorney who was sanctioned in 2023 said he thought ChatGPT was a “super search engine.” It took submitting a filing with fake citations to reveal that it’s more like a random-phrase generator — one that could give you either correct information or convincingly phrased nonsense.Andrew Perlman, the dean of Suffolk University Law School, argues many lawyers are using AI tools without incident, and the ones who get caught with fake citations are outliers. “I think that what we’re seeing now — although these problems of hallucination are real, and lawyers have to take it very seriously and be careful about it — doesn’t mean that these tools don’t have enormous possible benefits and use cases for the delivery of legal services,” Perlman said. Legal databases and research systems like Westlaw are incorporating AI services.In fact, 63 percent of lawyers surveyed by Thomson Reuters in 2024 said they’ve used AI in the past, and 12 percent said they use it regularly. Respondents said they use AI to write summaries of case law and to research “case law, statutes, forms or sample language for orders.” The attorneys surveyed by Thomson Reuters see it as a time-saving tool, and half of those surveyed said “exploring the potential for implementing AI” at work is their highest priority. “The role of a good lawyer is as a ‘trusted advisor’ not as a producer of documents,” one respondent said. But as plenty of recent examples have shown, the documents produced by AI aren’t always accurate, and in some cases aren’t real at all.RelatedIn one recent high-profile case, lawyers for journalist Tim Burke, who was arrested for publishing unaired Fox News footage in 2024, submitted a motion to dismiss the case against him on First Amendment grounds. After discovering that the filing included “significant misrepresentations and misquotations of supposedly pertinent case law and history,” Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, of Florida’s middle district, ordered the motion to be stricken from the case record. Mizelle found nine hallucinations in the document, according to the Tampa Bay Times.Mizelle ultimately let Burke’s lawyers, Mark Rasch and Michael Maddux, submit a new motion. In a separate filing explaining the mistakes, Rasch wrote that he “assumes sole and exclusive responsibility for these errors.” Rasch said he used the “deep research” feature on ChatGPT pro, which The Verge has previously tested with mixed results, as well as Westlaw’s AI feature.Rasch isn’t alone. Lawyers representing Anthropic recently admitted to using the company’s Claude AI to help write an expert witness declaration submitted as part of the copyright infringement lawsuit brought against Anthropic by music publishers. That filing included a citation with an “inaccurate title and inaccurate authors.” Last December, misinformation expert Jeff Hancock admitted he used ChatGPT to help organize citations in a declaration he submitted in support of a Minnesota law regulating deepfake use. Hancock’s filing included “two citation errors, popularly referred to as ‘hallucinations,’” and incorrectly listed authors for another citation. These documents do, in fact, matter — at least in the eyes of judges. In a recent case, a California judge presiding over a case against State Farm was initially swayed by arguments in a brief, only to find that the case law cited was completely made up. “I read their brief, was persuaded (or at least intrigued) by the authorities that they cited, and looked up the decisions to learn more about them – only to find that they didn’t exist,” Judge Michael Wilner wrote.Perlman said there are several less risky ways lawyers use generative AI in their work, including finding information in large tranches of discovery documents, reviewing briefs or filings, and brainstorming possible arguments or possible opposing views. “I think in almost every task, there are ways in which generative AI can be useful — not a substitute for lawyers’ judgment, not a substitute for the expertise that lawyers bring to the table, but in order to supplement what lawyers do and enable them to do their work better, faster, and cheaper,” Perlman said.But like anyone using AI tools, lawyers who rely on them to help with legal research and writing need to be careful to check the work they produce, Perlman said. Part of the problem is that attorneys often find themselves short on time — an issue he says existed before LLMs came into the picture. “Even before the emergence of generative AI, lawyers would file documents with citations that didn’t really address the issue that they claimed to be addressing,” Perlman said. “It was just a different kind of problem. Sometimes when lawyers are rushed, they insert citations, they don’t properly check them; they don’t really see if the case has been overturned or overruled.” (That said, the cases do at least typically exist.)Another, more insidious problem is the fact that attorneys — like others who use LLMs to help with research and writing — are too trusting of what AI produces. “I think many people are lulled into a sense of comfort with the output, because it appears at first glance to be so well crafted,” Perlman said.Alexander Kolodin, an election lawyer and Republican state representative in Arizona, said he treats ChatGPT as a junior-level associate. He’s also used ChatGPT to help write legislation. In 2024, he included AI text in part of a bill on deepfakes, having the LLM provide the “baseline definition” of what deepfakes are and then “I, the human, added in the protections for human rights, things like that it excludes comedy, satire, criticism, artistic expression, that kind of stuff,” Kolodin told The Guardian at the time. Kolodin said he “may have” discussed his use of ChatGPT with the bill’s main Democratic cosponsor but otherwise wanted it to be “an Easter egg” in the bill. The bill passed into law. Kolodin — who was sanctioned by the Arizona State Bar in 2020 for his involvement in lawsuits challenging the result of the 2020 election — has also used ChatGPT to write first drafts of amendments, and told The Verge he uses it for legal research as well. To avoid the hallucination problem, he said, he just checks the citations to make sure they’re real.“You don’t just typically send out a junior associate’s work product without checking the citations,” said Kolodin. “It’s not just machines that hallucinate; a junior associate could read the case wrong, it doesn’t really stand for the proposition cited anyway, whatever. You still have to cite-check it, but you have to do that with an associate anyway, unless they were pretty experienced.”Kolodin said he uses both ChatGPT’s pro “deep research” tool and the LexisNexis AI tool. Like Westlaw, LexisNexis is a legal research tool primarily used by attorneys. Kolodin said that in his experience, it has a higher hallucination rate than ChatGPT, which he says has “gone down substantially over the past year.” AI use among lawyers has become so prevalent that in 2024, the American Bar Association issued its first guidance on attorneys’ use of LLMs and other AI tools. Lawyers who use AI tools “have a duty of competence, including maintaining relevant technological competence, which requires an understanding of the evolving nature” of generative AI, the opinion reads. The guidance advises lawyers to “acquire a general understanding of the benefits and risks of the GAI tools” they use — or, in other words, to not assume that an LLM is a “super search engine.” Attorneys should also weigh the confidentiality risks of inputting information relating to their cases into LLMs and consider whether to tell their clients about their use of LLMs and other AI tools, it states.Perlman is bullish on lawyers’ use of AI. “I do think that generative AI is going to be the most impactful technology the legal profession has ever seen and that lawyers will be expected to use these tools in the future,” he said. “I think that at some point, we will stop worrying about the competence of lawyers who use these tools and start worrying about the competence of lawyers who don’t.”Others, including one of the judges who sanctioned lawyers for submitting a filing full of AI-generated hallucinations, are more skeptical. “Even with recent advances,” Wilner wrote, “no reasonably competent attorney should out-source research and writing to this technology — particularly without any attempt to verify the accuracy of that material.”See More:

Apple — and almost everybody else — has gotten a slight reprieve as a US court yesterday set aside the Trump tariff tax. But conflict and confusion continue to batter global trade, and while the news will provide a glimmer of relief, it will probably be short-lived. There’s always another dead cat to throw into the flames. Three judges from the US Court of International Trade found that the US International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which the Trump administration invoked to justify the imposition of these tariffs, does not give the president the authority to levy these taxes on trade. “The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder,” they wrote. The judgement does not impact the 25% “trafficking tariffs” imposed on Mexican and Canadian products and does not prevent the 20% trafficking tariff in place on Chinese goods. It does, however, end the “worldwide and retaliatory” 10-50% tariffs the administration threw at 57 countries. A coalition of small businesses took the case to court, arguing that only Congress has the authority to levy tariffs under the law used by the president’s office. They seem to have prevailed in the argument — at least, so far. It is interesting to note that the administration wanted all the tariff-related lawsuits moved to this particular court, as it felt it would receptive to the administration’s arguments.  This turned out to be an error. What is an emergency? Responding, a White House statement from spokesperson Kush Desai maintained the need for these tariffs, calling US trade deficits a “national emergency that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind and weakened our defense industrial base — facts that the court did not dispute.”  But can a trade in cheap consumer goods be seen as an unusual threat after it has been part of US culture for decades? Not according to the US Court of International Trade. The judges say the trade deficit does not meet the Nixon-era International Emergency Economic Powers Act requirement that an emergency can only be triggered by an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”  The journey is by no means over, of course. With the president recently threatening additional tariffs on iPhones made in India (“I have a bit of a problem with my friend, Tim Cook”), the reprieve may be brief.  Desai’s statement said “unelected judges” are not the right people to decide how to handle what he calls a national emergency. “The administration is committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American greatness.”  It seems likely to end at the Supreme Court, even while the administration argues that it should not be bound by the checks and balances that still remain under the US Constitution. For now, an appeal has been lodged with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington.  Where is the off-ramp? Apple, the world’s biggest consumer electronics company, which contributes a fortune to the US treasury and employs tens of thousands of Americans, will likely be relieved the tariffs have been set aside.  The reprieve implies that US consumers won’t need to pay more for their iPhones for a little longer yet and better reflects the reality that even if Apple were to shift iPhone manufacturing to the US, doing so would take years, cost billions, require engineering skills in quantities that do not yet exist in the US, would involve automation rather than large numbers of new jobs, and would be hampered by the availability of components and materials.  For the time being, at least, the judgment is a significant obstacle to the tariff taxes, albeit one that casts another spanner in the works for ongoing international trade talks. However, there is still scope for the administration to impose sector-specific taxes. All the same, “Tim Apple” will be acutely aware that the future will not look like the past, and the company’s $500 billion investment in the US will be part of the company’s future approach to manufacturing and trade. It suggests that while moving iPhone manufacturing to the US may be impractical, moving manufacture of some components and hardware may make sense. It is possible that as Apple and the US administration continue to negotiate, they may yet identify a road that enables both to declare some form of victory. You can follow me on social media! Join me on BlueSky,  LinkedIn, and Mastodon.

The Desktop Commander MCP Server is a powerful tool that brings all your development operations into one chat interface. Built on top of the MCP Filesystem Server, it allows you to search, edit, and manage files, run terminal commands, and control processes directly from your desktop using the Model Context Protocol (MCP). Following are the core capabilities of the Desktop Commander MCP server: Terminal & Process Control Execute terminal commands with live output streaming Set timeouts and run commands in the background Manage sessions for long-running tasks List and kill running processes with detailed info Configuration Management Get or set server settings like: defaultShell (e.g., bash, zsh) blockedCommands (e.g., rm, shutdown) allowedDirectories for file access telemetryEnabled Apply changes without restarting the server Filesystem Operations Read and write files with line-based limits Append or overwrite file content Create and list directories Move or rename files and folders Get file and directory metadata Search files by name (case-insensitive) Code & Text Editing Perform precise text replacements (e.g., change config values) Rewrite entire files for major updates Search and replace patterns across multiple files Use vscode-ripgrep for fast recursive text/code search Audit Logging All actions are logged with timestamps and arguments Logs auto-rotate at 10MB to avoid clutter In this tutorial, we will be connecting Claude desktop with the MCP server and perform some tasks. Step 1: Setting up dependencies Node JS We need npx to run the Desktop Commander server, which comes with Node.js. Download the latest version of Node.js from nodejs.org Run the installer. Leave all settings as default and complete the installation Claude Desktop Download Claude using https://claude.ai/download. Step 2: Configuring the MCP Server Next, configure Claude to connect to your MCP server. Open the claude_desktop_config.json file located in the Claude installation directory using any text editor. If the file doesn’t exist, you can create it manually. Once opened, enter the following code: { "mcpServers": { "desktop-commander": { "command": "npx", "args": [ "-y", "@wonderwhy-er/desktop-commander" ] } } } Step 3: Running the server Once the MCP configuration is complete, your server should appear in Claude. The Desktop Commander server is a powerful interface, offering 18 tools for tasks like file management, terminal execution, process control, and more. Feel free to follow us on Twitter and don’t forget to join our 95k+ ML SubReddit and Subscribe to our Newsletter. Arham IslamI am a Civil Engineering Graduate (2022) from Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, and I have a keen interest in Data Science, especially Neural Networks and their application in various areas.Arham Islamhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/arhamislam/Step-by-Step Guide to Creating Synthetic Data Using the Synthetic Data Vault (SDV)Arham Islamhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/arhamislam/Step-by-Step Guide to Create an AI agent with Google ADKArham Islamhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/arhamislam/Implementing an LLM Agent with Tool Access Using MCP-UseArham Islamhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/arhamislam/Implementing an AgentQL Model Context Protocol (MCP) Server

How I learned to stop sweating every UI detail and ship fasterMade by the author with Midjourney.I wasted too much time early in my design career sweating the wrong details. Now I ask one question before every UI decision:“Default it, or design it?”This simple heuristic has saved me countless hours and arguments, especially in startup environments where resources are limited and speed matters.Every design project requires you to make hundreds of decisions. Some are big like the overall layout. Others are small like the hover state of a button. Facing too many choices can lead to analysis paralysis, making it hard to move forward.Why this mattersProblems arise when designers spend too much time on lower-value minutia at the expense of big, strategic decisions: projects stall, deadlines slip, and teams get frustrated.I’ve been guilty of this more times than I’d like to admit.Looking back, I used to get lost trying to solve details that weren’t immediately relevant. Like, I’d polish edge cases before the core flow was even solid. I thought I was being thorough but really, I was just misallocating energy.Now I try to spot where the real leverage is. Not every moment in the product deserves the same attention. Some things just need to work. Others need to shine.The two pathsWhen you default it, you’re leaning on existing solutions: design systems, platform conventions, or vendor tools. You’re not ignoring the problem, you’re delegating the decision to something (or someone) that’s already solved it well enough.When you design it, you’re choosing to spend the time because you believe that decision has the potential to differentiate. You’re investing creative energy where it can make a meaningful impact.Both paths are valid. The power comes from choosing intentionally.The “Default It” approachThe “Default It” approach is most valuable when you’re getting hung up on a micro-level detail while working on a macro-level project.It’s not that the detail is unimportant, but it’s not the intent of that work. By defaulting micro-level decisions to existing resources, you can expedite macro-level projects.In my experience, many product managers lean toward this approach. “Defaulting it” helps move projects along faster by reducing scope. But if we default every decision, we’re likely to miss opportunities to innovate.The “Design It” approachThe “Design It” approach is most valuable when you need headspace to work in-depth on critical choices that shape outcomes in significant ways.You can make time to “design it” with micro or macro-level work, but each requires your full attention. It can be difficult to toggle between these different points of view, so I find it helpful to scope projects intentionally to focus on one at a time.Designers naturally gravitate toward this approach. It’s where creativity and innovation shine. However, trying to design every small detail can slow projects to a crawl and lead to blown budgets.Finding the right balanceFinding the right balance means negotiating which decisions to default and which to design so your team can focus attention in the right places at the right times.Product managers might push for “defaulting it” to save time and stay on schedule, while designers might advocate for “designing it” to explore creative solutions. This healthy tension can lead to finding the sweet spot for product development.For example, on one product I worked on, we needed to visualize large graph databases. Building a vector-based visualization library from scratch would have given us flexibility, but it wasn’t going to move the needle for our customer experience. We decided to “default” that data viz solution to a third-party vendor whose entire focus was on building that technology. This freed our team to focus on applying those tools to solve our customers’ problems more quickly and effectively.How design systems fit InAs projects grow, certain decisions come up repeatedly. This is where design systems become valuable.A design system is essentially your collection of team approved defaults.While in the early days of a product you might default mostly to external industry standards, over time you’ll encapsulate more of your own decision-making into custom defaults specific to your service.By storing your “defaulted” decisions in a central repository, you reduce the overhead for making solid baseline design choices. This list evolves to reflect updated defaults as new projects demand new solutions, freeing up time to focus on unique challenges.Final thoughts“Default it or design it” helps me triage.It helps my team align. And it helps us ship.By intentionally choosing when to default and when to design, I save time, focus on what’s critical, and direct my creative energy to the most pressing problems.Some moments in a product just need to work. Others need to shine.“Default it or design it” helps me know the difference.Patrick Morgan is the creator of Unknown Arts and lead product designer at Sublime Security. If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to his newsletter and follow him on LinkedIn for weekly insights.Default it or design it was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

While there’s more than one way to format Unity C# code, agreeing on a consistent code style for your project enables your team to develop a clean, readable, and scalable codebase. In this blog, we provide some guidelines and examples you can use to develop and maintain your own code style guide.Please note that these are only recommendations based on those provided by Microsoft. This is your chance to get inspired and decide what works best for your team.Ideally, a Unity project should feel like it’s been developed by a single author, no matter how many developers actually work on it. A style guide can help unify your approach for creating a more cohesive codebase.It’s a good idea to follow industry standards wherever possible and browse through existing style guides as a starting point for creating your own. In partnership with internal and external Unity experts, we released a new e-book, Create a C# style guide: Write cleaner code that scales for inspiration, based on Microsoft’s comprehensive C# style.The Google C# style guide is another great resource for defining guidelines around naming, formatting, and commenting conventions. Again, there is no right or wrong method, but we chose to follow Microsoft standards for our own guide.Our e-book, along with an example C# file, are available for free. Both resources focus on the most common coding conventions you’ll encounter while developing in Unity. These are all, essentially, a subset of the Microsoft Framework Design guidelines, which include an extensive number of best practices beyond what we cover in this post.We recommend customizing the guidelines provided in our style guide to suit your team’s preferences. These preferences should be prioritized over our suggestions and the Microsoft Framework Design guidelines if they’re in conflict.The development of a style guide requires an upfront investment but will pay dividends later. For example, managing a single set of standards can reduce the time developers spend on ramping up if they move onto another project.Of course, consistency is key. If you follow these suggestions and need to modify your style guide in the future, a few find-and-replace operations can quickly migrate your codebase.Concentrate on creating a pragmatic style guide that fits your needs by covering the majority of day-to-day use cases. Don’t overengineer it by attempting to account for every single edge case from the start. The guide will evolve organically over time as your team iterates on it from project to project.Most style guides include basic formatting rules. Meanwhile, specific naming conventions, policy on use of namespaces, and strategies for classes are somewhat abstract areas that can be refined over time.Let’s look at some common formatting and naming conventions you might consider for your style guide.The two common indentation styles in C# are the Allman style, which places the opening curly braces on a new line (also known as the BSD style from BSD Unix), and the K&R style, or “one true brace style,” which keeps the opening brace on the same line as the previous header.In an effort to improve readability, we picked the Allman style for our guide, based on the Microsoft Framework Design guidelines: Whatever style you choose, ensure that every programmer on your team follows it.A guide should also indicate whether braces from nested multiline statements should be included. While removing braces in the following example won’t throw an error, it can be confusing to read. That’s why our guide recommends applying braces for clarity, even if they are optional.Something as simple as horizontal spacing can enhance your code’s appearance onscreen. While your personal formatting preferences can vary, here are a few recommendations from our style guide to improve overall readability:Add spaces to decrease code density:The extra whitespace can give a sense of visual separation between parts of a lineUse a single space after a comma, between function arguments.Don’t add a space after the parenthesis and function arguments.Don’t use spaces between a function name and parenthesis.Avoid spaces inside brackets.Use a single space before flow control conditions: Add a space between the flow comparison operator and the parentheses.Use a single space before and after comparison operators.Variables typically represent a state, so try to attribute clear and descriptive nouns to their names. You can then prefix booleans with a verbfor variables that must indicate a true or false value. Often they are the answer to a question such as, is the player running? Is the game over? Prefix them with a verb to clarify their meaning. This is often paired with a description or condition, e.g., isPlayerDead, isWalking, hasDamageMultiplier, etc.Since methods perform actions, a good rule of thumb is to start their names with a verb and add context as needed, e.g., GetDirection, FindTarget, and so on, based on the return type. If the method has a bool return type, it can also be framed as a question.Much like boolean variables themselves, prefix methods with a verb if they return a true-false condition. This phrases them in the form of a question, e.g., IsGameOver, HasStartedTurn.Several conventions exist for naming events and event handles. In our style guide, we name the event with a verb phrase,similar to a method. Choose a name that communicates the state change accurately.Use the present or past participle to indicate events “before” or “after.” For instance, specify OpeningDoor for an event before opening a door and DoorOpened for an event afterward.We also recommend that you don’t abbreviate names. While saving a few characters can feel like a productivity gain in the short term, what is obvious to you now might not be in a year’s time to another teammate. Your variable names should reveal their intent and be easy to pronounce. Single letter variables are fine for loops and math expressions, but otherwise, you should avoid abbreviations. Clarity is more important than any time saved from omitting a few vowels.At the same time, use one variable declaration per line; it’s less compact, but also less error prone and enhances readability. Avoid redundant names. If your class is called Player, you don’t need to create member variables called PlayerScore or PlayerTarget. Trim them down to Score or Target.In addition, avoid too many prefixes or special encoding.A practice highlighted in our guide is to prefix private member variables with an underscore (_) to differentiate them from local variables. Some style guides use prefixes for private member variables (m_), constants (k_), or static variables (s_), so the name reveals more about the variable.However, it’s good practice to prefix interface names with a capital “I” and follow this with an adjective that describes the functionality. You can even prefix the event raising method (in the subject) with “On”: The subject that invokes the event usually does so from a method prefixed with “On,” e.g., OnOpeningDoor or OnDoorOpened.Camel case and Pascal case are common standards in use, compared to Snake or Kebab case, or Hungarian notations. Our guide recommends Pascal case for public fields, enums, classes, and methods, and Camel case for private variables, as this is common practice in Unity.There are many additional rules to consider outside of what’s covered here. The example guide and our new e-book, Create a C# style guide: Write cleaner code that scales, provide many more tips for better organization.The concept of clean code aims to make development more scalable by conforming to a set of production standards. A style guide should remove most of the guesswork developers would otherwise have regarding the conventions they should follow. Ultimately, this guide should help your team establish a consensus around your codebase to grow your project into a commercial-scale production.Just how comprehensive your style guide should be depends on your situation. It’s up to your team to decide if they want their guide to set rules for more abstract, intangible concepts. This could include rules for using namespaces, breaking down classes, or implementing directives like the #region directive (or not). While #region can help you collapse and hide sections of code in C# files, making large files more manageable, it’s also an example of something that many developers consider to be code smells or anti-patterns. Therefore, you might want to avoid setting strict standards for these aspects of code styling. Not everything needs to be outlined in the guide – sometimes it’s enough to simply discuss and make decisions as a team.When we talked to the experts who helped create our guide, their main piece of advice was code readability above all else. Here are some pointers on how to achieve that:Use fewer arguments: Arguments can increase the complexity of your method. By reducing their number, you make methods easier to read and test.Avoid excessive overloading: You can generate an endless permutation of method overloads. Select the few that reflect how you’ll call the method, and then implement those. If you do overload a method, prevent confusion by making sure that each method signature has a distinct number of arguments.Avoid side effects: A method only needs to do what its name advertises. Avoid modifying anything outside of its scope. Pass in arguments by value instead of reference when possible. So when sending back results via the out or ref keyword, verify that’s the one thing you intend the method to accomplish. Though side effects are useful for certain tasks, they can lead to unintended consequences. Write a method without side effects to cut down on unexpected behavior.We hope that this blog helps you kick off the development of your own style guide. Learn more from our example C# file and brand new e-book where you can review our suggested rules and customize them to your team’s preferences.The specifics of individual rules are less important than having everyone agree to follow them consistently. When in doubt, rely on your team’s own evolving guide to settle any style disagreements. After all, this is a group effort.