Re: Clever UNIX/C Constructs

I agree 100% that code should be made as simple as possible,
self-documenting, and readable.  I actually agree 200%!  Even after my 20
or so years of writing code, I STILL examine every routine that I write to
see if theres ANY WAY it can be clearer.

However.  What I most definitely do NOT agree with you about is that "+="
type code makes it difficult to read, or less simple.  

*NOW* can we leave this up to a vote, and stop beating it to death?


On 6 Jan 2001, Frank Kolmann wrote:

> Scott Wrote: (I apologise if it was not)
> 
> >If you don't like the += type operators, don't vote for them.  If you do,
> >vote for them.  Let the majority decide.  Isn't that what VOTES are FOR?
> >
> >Don't you feel the slightest bit guilty saying "I dont like the short form
> >operators, so people shouldnt be allowed to vote for them!"???
> 
> Democracy is a wonderful thing but is it the best way to design a
> compiler. This is not a question of personal likes and dislikes.
> I contend that there are basic rules to programming and 
> consequently programming languages must conform to
> those rules. Guilty, of what should I be guilty. Do I impinge on
> your personal freedoms, if so I apologise, it was never my
> intent.
> 
> HHL languages developed to make it EASIER for you and
> me to write computer code. One should respect others
> especially those that will in future pick up your code and
> MAINTAIN it.  The code should never be an exercise
> in how terse and/or obtuse can I make a function.
> Code must be self documenting.
> It must be readable.
> It must be simple.
> (Was not a objective of COBOL to be all of the above)
> In the final washup a programming language CANNOT
> enforce readable, maintainable, simple code.
> It is up to the programmers.  What is the reason the GOTO
> is looked upon with scorn.  I have written perfectable readable
> code using GOTOs, if one adhears to the KISS principal the
> code is by definition simple.  I have seen structured IF/ELSE
> code 20 levels deep with a few IFNE thrown in that I 
> could only understand once I rewrote and untangled it.
> I suppose all I am saying is that if you introduce a way to
> complicate things programmers will do so. I still cringe
> when I see some of my early code and I wonder just
> who was I trying to impress. I could go on but enuff said.
> Frank Kolmann
> 

+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---