Idiotic programming style edicts
in [General Programming]
|
Prev: System Calls
Next: Warning to newbies
From: Nick Keighley on 19 Mar 2010 09:01 On 19 Mar, 12:51, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > spinoza1111 wrote: > > On Mar 18, 9:19 pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > >> spinoza1111 wrote: > >>> On Mar 17, 2:13 am, gaze...(a)shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) > >>> wrote: > >>>> In article <IU.D20100316.T165150.P1185...(a)J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost>, > >>>> Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgro...(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: > >> <snip> > > >>>>> Such edicts make one want to write code in the form > >>>>> x /* The variable x */ > >>>>> = /* is assigned */ > >>>>> x /* its value * / > >>>>> + /* plus * / > >>>>> 2 /* two */ > >>>>> ; /* . */ > >>> Nothing wrong with this style of commenting in assembler, at all. And, > >>> this code sample looks like the one byte per instruction language > >>> Mouse. > >> <snip> > > >> Are you nuts? > > > No, just that rarity: a competent programmer (the best one in this > > newsgroup, probably) > > Now I know you have a 99% reality filter. > > >who's literate. > > Wrong. there are more capable people in a.f.c. does the name Edward Nilges ring a bell?
From: Jongware on 19 Mar 2010 09:34 On 18-Mar-10 14:01 PM, spinoza1111 wrote: > On Mar 17, 2:13 am, gaze...(a)shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) > wrote: >> In article<IU.D20100316.T165150.P1185...(a)J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost>, >> Jonathan de Boyne Pollard<J.deBoynePollard-newsgro...(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >> >>>>> ... which only serve to increase the noise floor. >> >>>> In our shop, those appeared when we got the idiotic edict that each >>>> line had to have a comment. >> >>> Such edicts make one want to write code in the form >> >>> x /* The variable x */ >>> = /* is assigned */ >>> x /* its value * / >>> + /* plus * / >>> 2 /* two */ >>> ; /* . */ > > Nothing wrong with this style of commenting in assembler, at all. Really? Example: (from a previous discussion on comp.programming) mov edx,len ; move constant into register edx mov ecx,msg ; move address into register ecx mov ebx,1 ; move constant into register ebx mov eax,4 ; move constant into register eax int 0x80 ; call system interrupt mov eax,1 ; move constant into register eax int 0x80 ; call system interrupt This is Intel 80x86 assembly, and the comments exactly describe what each of the opcodes do -- completely comparable to your + /* plus */ Now how useful is that? Compare with: mov edx,len ;message length mov ecx,msg ;message to write mov ebx,1 ;file descriptor (stdout) mov eax,4 ;system call number (sys_write) int 0x80 ;call kernel mov eax,1 ;system call number (sys_exit) int 0x80 ;call kernel ... and suddenly it makes sense, even to one not used to assembly. [Jw]
From: jmfbahciv on 19 Mar 2010 10:08 Nick Keighley wrote: > On 19 Mar, 12:51, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: >> spinoza1111 wrote: >>> On Mar 18, 9:19 pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: >>>> spinoza1111 wrote: >>>>> On Mar 17, 2:13 am, gaze...(a)shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> In article <IU.D20100316.T165150.P1185...(a)J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost>, >>>>>> Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgro...(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >>>> <snip> >>>>>>> Such edicts make one want to write code in the form >>>>>>> x /* The variable x */ >>>>>>> = /* is assigned */ >>>>>>> x /* its value * / >>>>>>> + /* plus * / >>>>>>> 2 /* two */ >>>>>>> ; /* . */ >>>>> Nothing wrong with this style of commenting in assembler, at all. And, >>>>> this code sample looks like the one byte per instruction language >>>>> Mouse. >>>> <snip> >>>> Are you nuts? >>> No, just that rarity: a competent programmer (the best one in this >>> newsgroup, probably) >> Now I know you have a 99% reality filter. >> >>> who's literate. >> Wrong. there are more capable people in a.f.c. > > does the name Edward Nilges ring a bell? Nope. What does this have to do programming productivity? /BAH
From: Jongware on 19 Mar 2010 10:01 On 19-Mar-10 15:08 PM, jmfbahciv wrote: > Nick Keighley wrote: >> On 19 Mar, 12:51, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: >>> spinoza1111 wrote: >>>> On Mar 18, 9:19 pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: >>>>> spinoza1111 wrote: >>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:13 am, gaze...(a)shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> In article >>>>>>> <IU.D20100316.T165150.P1185...(a)J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost>, >>>>>>> Jonathan de Boyne Pollard >>>>>>> <J.deBoynePollard-newsgro...(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>> Such edicts make one want to write code in the form >>>>>>>> x /* The variable x */ >>>>>>>> = /* is assigned */ >>>>>>>> x /* its value * / >>>>>>>> + /* plus * / >>>>>>>> 2 /* two */ >>>>>>>> ; /* . */ >>>>>> Nothing wrong with this style of commenting in assembler, at all. >>>>>> And, >>>>>> this code sample looks like the one byte per instruction language >>>>>> Mouse. >>>>> <snip> >>>>> Are you nuts? >>>> No, just that rarity: a competent programmer (the best one in this >>>> newsgroup, probably) >>> Now I know you have a 99% reality filter. >>> >>>> who's literate. >>> Wrong. there are more capable people in a.f.c. >> >> does the name Edward Nilges ring a bell? > > > Nope. What does this have to do programming productivity? Nothing whatsoever. That particular name is an inextractible part of usenet lore, though. [Jw]
From: Charlie Gibbs on 19 Mar 2010 13:03
In article <19d8b04d-a307-4f2e-ab5c-b58607b2f3dc(a)z1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>, spinoza1111(a)yahoo.com (spinoza1111) writes: > I can walk and simultaneously chew Nicorette Gum > Can you, chum? I don't smoke. -- /~\ cgibbs(a)kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign! |