![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Halbert wrote:
>
> Why doesn't the rest of the world understand that?
>
But they do understand. Each in his own way.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
I'm a rebel I use both ways and other ways.
If the 'if' condition is short I put it all line.
if it's a little longer maybe the line below
Readable is minor compared to the total lack of documentation people use
in their C and c++ programs.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> I, for one, find it much easier to read C++ code which is braced like
> this:
Me too, that's how I code and how I code in POV too. I think it looks much
nicer spaced out like that, I think of the braces as a way to force a line
of white-space (apart from the brace character, obviously) above and below
blocks of code.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Stephen wrote:
> What happened to you? I thought that you were coming for a drink
> tonight?
Oh.
I thought I said I'd check whether I'm available and get back to you?
[Which admittedly I never did...]
Turns out I had to move furnature around instead. Sorry about that...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:06:14 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>
>> What happened to you? I thought that you were coming for a drink
>> tonight?
>
>Oh.
>
>I thought I said I'd check whether I'm available and get back to you?
>[Which admittedly I never did...]
>
>Turns out I had to move furnature around instead. Sorry about that...
Good job we waited in the pub ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> Oh.
>>
>> I thought I said I'd check whether I'm available and get back to you?
>> [Which admittedly I never did...]
>>
>> Turns out I had to move furnature around instead. Sorry about that...
>
> Good job we waited in the pub ;)
Oh well - I hope you lot enjoyed yourselves even if I didn't. Heh. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Gail Shaw wrote:
[...]
> Whereas I find the first far too spread out to be able to read easily and
> use the second as my standard code layout in C-like languages
Heh, that reminds me... Some guy actually wrote code like this:
if (DoNot == 0)
{
DoThis = true;
} else {
DoThis = false;
}
This was a few years back and on old university monitors, so he didn't
actually have much more than 10 commands TOTAL on screen at any given
time. How you keep an overview over the entire algorithm in that manner
is lost on me, and obviously on him, too: he didn't get his code working
in three weeks.
Regards,
Tim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Tim Nikias wrote:
>
> Heh, that reminds me... Some guy actually wrote code like this:
>
Somehow those variables remind me of what I've decided I'll do at work
some day, when I'll have a place where it fits:
if (!successful) {
try_harder();
}
> Regards,
> Tim
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethis zbxt net invalid
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp <war### [at] tag povray org> wrote:
> Gail Shaw <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:
> > Whereas I find the first far too spread out to be able to read easily
>
> Compactness does not imply readability. On the contrary.
>
> --
> - Warp
IBELIEV
ETHATIN
THISCAS
EIAMCOM
PELLEDT
OAGREEW
ITHYOU!
BEST
REGA
RDSM
IKEC
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> Compactness does not imply readability. On the contrary.
I'd say that there is only a fairly weak correlation (positive or
negative) between compactness and readability.
x = 2*y*y*y - 3*a*b
is much more readable than
t1 = y*y
t2 = y*t1
t3 = 2*t2
t4 = a*b
t5 = 3*t4
t6 = t3-t5
despite being much more compact. Counter-examples in the opposite
direction are not hard to find either.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |