Braces tucked in the sides, or right through?

[Herman]

Some braces we tuck into the sides, some not. But those who are "notched in", can be fitted in two ways.

1st, The brace tucked into the kerfed lining, but not through the sides. A lot of instructions go this way. Advantage is that you can make the end of the brace as thick as you like. Downside is that it is more hussle to make it.

2nd, Right through the kerfed linings and sides. Advantage here is that you can rout right though all. Simple. Downside is that the binding later on should cover the gap. Therefore the end of the brace cannot be thicker than ballpark 0.1".

What do you do? Thoughts?
Spoiler: I go for no 2.
Herman

[Carl Dickinson]

#2 for me too.

[peter havriluk]

Door number 2, please. Don't want to to spend effort only to see the care wasted when the router carries away the side anyway to make room for the binding.

[Dave Bagwill]

I like #1. But I only inlet the UTB and braces in the upper bout.

[John Parchem]

I always do number 1. I used to leave my brace ends thick enough such that the pocket was deeper than the thin bindings I use on some classicals. It is so easy to make the pockets that I do ot the same for all instruments

[Herman]

3 to 2 so far.
So to Dave and John: What is the advantage, to you, to leave the brace ends larger than 0.1"?

FWIW: I played a Taylor maple jumbo, where the back braces ended about 2" before the lining.

[Dave Bagwill]

I make no claims as to a benefit for #1, but I enjoy the process and it feels good to me,