|
Hi, > We've all heard that you should use named constants in place of literals, > but how far do you take this? I only use named constants when it clarifies the code. I realize that this makes it a bit subjective. :) In your example, having a named constant called STATUS really doesn't gain you anything over the literal '*STATUS'. Putting it in a named constant in that case actually increases the work that the next programmer has to do -- he has to search around to see what the constant contains. Especially since the programmer won't know that it's a constant rather than a variable -- and STATUS is a relatively common name for a variable. On the other hand, x = open('/tmp/blah.txt': 74: 438) is not very intutive. In that case, the constants clarify things: x = open('/tmp/blah.txt': O_WRONLY+O_TRUNC+O_CREAT: M_RDWR); Now, assuming that you're familiar with the parms of this API, you know what the programmer intended... write only, truncate, and create -- and grant read/write permissions. In our shop, anyway, it's not so much a "standard" as it is a "use your own judgement, just do your best" type of thing.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.