The article makes a subtle mention of it, but this stuff was already in Epic/Unreal's "Coding Standard" back in 2022, and had been posted about in a fair number of places like here iirc. So "why now" could just be a matter of influencers/sites trying to jump on a headline opportunity.
Also, I went ahead and compared the Standards from 5.0 vs 5.4. While some predictably retarded additions or tweaks were made, there wasn't anything substantially different.
Although there was this one line that I hadn't noticed back in 2022: "Following the coding standards is mandatory.". I'm not sure if that's supposed to be legally binding at all though. I'd have to analyze the hell out of the EULA and other licensing agreements to be sure.
The article makes a subtle mention of it, but it was already in Epic/Unreal's "Coding Standard" back in 2022, and had been posted about in a fair number of places like here iirc. So "why now" could just be a matter of influencers/sites trying to jump on a headline opportunity.
Comparing 5.4 vs 5.0, most of all I see are small little additional details. Most of the additions are, naturally, exceedingly retarded, but there's nothing substantially different. Certainly nothing that seems to indicate more serious intent of "enforcement".
Although I didn't notice this before, even two years ago, but at the very top in both versions it does state: "Following the coding standards is mandatory.".
I have no idea if any of that could be legally binding though, and the wording of that statement may have been intended more-so for syntax rules (for which, not following would probably end up in a fair number of errors and compiling issues).
The article makes a subtle mention of it, but it was already in Epic/Unreal's "Coding Standard" back in 2022, and had been posted about in a fair number of places like here iirc. So "why now" could just be a matter of influencers/sites trying to jump on a headline opportunity.
Comparing 5.4 vs 5.0, most of all I see are small little additional details. Most of the additions are, naturally, exceedingly retarded, but there's nothing substantially different. Certainly nothing that seems to indicate more serious intent of "enforcement".
Although I didn't notice this before, but at the very top in both versions it does state: "Following the coding standards is mandatory.".
I have no idea if any of that could be legally binding though, and the wording of that statement may have been intended more-so for syntax rules (for which, not following would probably end up in a fair number of errors and compiling issues).