Subj : Re: Is well written code a rare species ?
To   : comp.programming
From : akarl
Date : Sun Aug 14 2005 10:39 pm

Phlip wrote:
> akarl wrote:
>>   y := stuff * distVal
>>      + x
>>
>>Even if you use more than 80 columns you probably need to break lines 
>>sometimes anyway.
> 
>   y = stuff * distVal
>   y += x

If I encountered this code I would scratch my head and change it to the 
above.

> And don't get me started about :=. A math professor's self-righteous 
> indignation that = some how does not mean "assignment", when CPUs cannot 
> enforce an equality operation as rigorous as a math proof anyway, is 
> completely specious and is not an excuse for us to type an extra : character 
> in every single one of the most common kind of statement in all of 
> programming.

We need an operator for equality tests and why would we choose anything 
other than the symbol used in math? This means that the same symbol can 
not be used for assignment (unless we overload it). I recall us having 
this discussion some months ago, so I won't delve into it again. This is 
not comp.lang.<some-c-family-language> so you simply have to accept 
variations in syntax.

>>>format might have been a better printing option.  So, you see, it didn't
>>>make any sense - but what added insult to injury was the team went
>>>apoplectic when I started to format my functions thus:
>>>
>>>type
>>>function name(
>>>    type parameter1, // comment
>>>    type parameter2, // comment
>>>    type parameter3 // comment
>>>    type parameter4 // comment
>>>){
>>>    blah blah
>>>}
> 
> 
> Uh, in theory so many parameters indicate a latent object, with its own 
> commentaries. I will crack down on you regarding that rule shortly after I 
> start following it myself...

Learn how to quote. If you want to comment on something Joe wrote, reply 
to his message.

August

.