preece@ccvaxa.UUCP (08/05/85)
> In article <2600006@ccvaxa> preece@ccvaxa.UUCP writes: > > Unfortunately, the name 'opentest' doesn't imply that the variable > > named 'foo' has been set to the new fd and that the file is now open. > > It implies (to me, at least) a test of whether it is possible to > > open the file. Now, if you wanted to call it "TRY_TO_OPEN", I would > > be more likely to interpret the name correctly, but some people might > > interpret that name as a Boolean indicating whether or not to try to > > open the file. Naming is very tricky. Doing the operation is very > > clear. > > On the other hand we have somebody saying that a particular word isn't > clear enough (opentest) and offering up another (TRY_TO_OPEN) saying > that his is unambiguous. (I don't quite follow him though, since > all EITHER open() or fopen() do is TRY_TO_OPEN a file, returning > an indicator as to their success, that the indicator is also useful > in later code isn't important). ---------- What I was TRYING to say was that NEITHER name was very good and that I thought you should let C look like C and use the "if ( (x=fopen(...)) == NULL) {...}" form. Words are too likely to mean one thing to me and another to you. Don't use a macro or procedure unless it's a useful, clear abstraction of what is being done. -- scott preece gould/csd - urbana ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece