> But that, friends, is the problem with comments. Code is > usually hard to read, comments easy.
No! 10.0e3 times no! I find code *MUCH* easier to read than comments. People too often write entirely vague generalities in comments. If I want to know what is happening I look at the code. The comments can act as signposts but no more than that and you certainly don't trust them! > And another thing (sorry, I've bottled this up for a long > time) related to comments. Program variable names. I was > trained, and for a while I trained others, to use great big > long names which convey intentions. Names like > thedistancetothetrainbehindus or > thetimesincewepassedthelastredsignal, instead of names like d > and t. When I started getting analytical about programming, I > started to read and to write code which used names like f, x > and y. A great advantage of conciseness was revealed: you can > read the code because (a) it's small, not being bloated with > all those big names; (b) you read it for what it is and not > what the author was thinking about when they wrote it. It also is idiomatic. Any competent programmer knows that i,j and k are temporary holders for integer values because that is how people have used for years and years. It may be a stupid convention and have absolutely no rule in law but it is what happens. Of course if you are dealing with incompetent programmers then all bets are of, but you can soon spot them as they use I,j and k for variables that ought to have more meaningful names. (Though heaven forfend that they should be *long* meanignful names!!) L. - Automatic footer for [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] unsubscribe discuss To join the announcements list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribe announce To receive a help file, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] help This list is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/ If you have any problems or questions, please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
