sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) (12/08/89)
From article <257E97F4.24962@ateng.com>, by chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg): > > For example, "i = i + 1" is inherently harder to read than "i++", since the But more programmers (BASIC, pascal, etc.) use "i = i + 1", and using "i++" assumes future programmers working with the code know C. Obviously, the first choice is the correct choice :-|. -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. San Dimas, CA
parke@galaxy.enet.dec.com (12/08/89)
In article <1989Dec7.192215.27671@aqdata.uucp>, sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: > From article <257E97F4.24962@ateng.com>, by chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg): > > > > For example, "i = i + 1" is inherently harder to read than "i++", since the > > But more programmers (BASIC, pascal, etc.) use "i = i + 1", and using "i++" > assumes future programmers working with the code know C. Obviously, the > first choice is the correct choice :-|. > -- Not to mention the fact that i++ is dependent on what i is (though in C so is +1 (which might be 1,2,4,8... )) }8-)} Bill
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (12/08/89)
In article <1989Dec7.192215.27671@aqdata.uucp>, sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: > From article <257E97F4.24962@ateng.com>, by chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg): > > > > For example, "i = i + 1" is inherently harder to read than "i++", since the > > But more programmers (BASIC, pascal, etc.) use "i = i + 1", and using "i++" > assumes future programmers working with the code know C. Obviously, the > first choice is the correct choice :-|. When I am writing a C program, I expect future programmers that will be working with it to know C. If not, then I should have written it in a different language. -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Conor P. Cahill uunet!virtech!cpcahil 703-430-9247 ! | Virtual Technologies Inc., P. O. Box 876, Sterling, VA 22170 | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
darcy@druid.uucp (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) (12/08/89)
In article <1989Dec7.192215.27671@aqdata.uucp> sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: >From article <257E97F4.24962@ateng.com>, by chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg): >> >> For example, "i = i + 1" is inherently harder to read than "i++", since the > >But more programmers (BASIC, pascal, etc.) use "i = i + 1", and using "i++" >assumes future programmers working with the code know C. Obviously, the >first choice is the correct choice :-|. Huh!! You mean C code should be readable by people who don't know C? -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain (darcy@druid) | "You mean druid wasn't taken yet???" D'Arcy Cain Consulting | - Everybody - West Hill, Ontario, Canada | No disclaimers. I agree with me |
jmann@bigbootay (Jim Mann) (12/08/89)
Yes, some constructs in C are hard to understand for those new to the language. i++ is NOT one of them. Yes, BASIC, FORTRAN, PL/I, and so forth use i = i + 1 to increment i. However, if you know any C at all, you know what i++ and i-- mean. If you don't, you probably shouldn't be trying to maintain C code.
sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) (12/09/89)
From article <1989Dec8.122534.1253@virtech.uucp>, by cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill): > In article <1989Dec7.192215.27671@aqdata.uucp>, sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: >> >> But more programmers (BASIC, pascal, etc.) use "i = i + 1", and using "i++" >> assumes future programmers working with the code know C. Obviously, the >> first choice is the correct choice :-|. > > When I am writing a C program, I expect future programmers that will be working > with it to know C. If not, then I should have written it in a different > language. 1) Somebody can't read little smirking faces. 2) If we can assume that C programmers will be maintaining C code (a reasonable assumption) then they should be able to understand commas. -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. San Dimas, CA
bret@codonics.COM (Bret Orsburn) (12/12/89)
In article <1989Dec8.122534.1253@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: >When I am writing a C program, I expect future programmers that will be working >with it to know C. AMEN, Brother! At least we can draw the line on portamania at the boundary between languages! :-) -- ------------------- bret@codonics.com uunet!codonics!bret Bret Orsburn
mark@jhereg.Minnetech.MN.ORG (Mark H. Colburn) (12/13/89)
In article <1989Dec7.192215.27671@aqdata.uucp> sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: >But more programmers (BASIC, pascal, etc.) use "i = i + 1", and using "i++" >assumes future programmers working with the code know C. Obviously, the >first choice is the correct choice :-|. If the programmers that are maintaining the code do not know about the little details of C, such as post decrement and post increment operators, then they are going to have a really tough time understanding virtually any code that uses the features of the language that make it so desirable. Writing code to the least common denomonator is not a good way to write code. If there are portable features of a language that would be known to a competent programmer in that language, then you should use them. I would say that using techniques which are tricky and unportable should be avoided, unless they are absolutely necessary. You have to assume that the person that is going to be working with your code is fluent in the language that you are using, or that they will be learning quickly! Portability is not just so that code can be moved to differenct architectures and run, but also to allow programmers to move between different architectures and understand code. -- Mark H. Colburn mark@Minnetech.MN.ORG Open Systems Architects, Inc.
amull@Morgan.COM (Andrew P. Mullhaupt) (12/14/89)
In article <593@codonics.COM>, bret@codonics.COM (Bret Orsburn) writes: > In article <1989Dec8.122534.1253@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: > >When I am writing a C program, I expect future programmers that will be working > >with it to know C. > > > AMEN, Brother! At least we can draw the line on portamania at the boundary > between languages! :-) Say the boundary between C (UNIX-Style like on a Sun) and C (ANSI-Style like with prototypes)? (:-)) Later, Andrew Mullhaupt