Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 11:37:24 +0100 From: Cliff Sarginson <cls@raggedclown.net> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Style(9) question Message-ID: <20021123103724.GA11632@raggedclown.net> In-Reply-To: <3DDF52B9.88E852F6@mindspring.com> References: <XFMail.20021122160808.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <a05200f1eba04a864625b@[192.168.0.3]> <3DDF241B.FF30ACE2@mindspring.com> <20021123095502.GB11348@raggedclown.net> <3DDF52B9.88E852F6@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 02:04:41AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Cliff Sarginson wrote: > > > That means that they are limited to holding in their head only the > > > maximum amount of data that can be displayed on a screen at a time, > > > so the more non-whitespace data you can display in a limited amount > > > of real-estate, the better. > > > > Psychologically speaking I think this is not necessarily true. > > Programs aside there can be too much information on a screen, a > > multitude of web-sites are like this. The logical conclusion (although I > > don't think it is the one you are trying to make btw) is that you should > > have multiple statements on a line. > > Perl. 8-). > Well the deign of Perl (or perhaps the lack of it!) is so eccentric that I suppose programming in it might as well maintain that status-quo :) > > I am fairly keen on a the rather ad-hoc "rule" that if you cannot see the > > whole of a "C" function on the > > screen at the same time then you need to re-think it out. The exception > > to this being functions that are simply decision-makers, such as a long > > "switch" that simply sets flags etc. > > You must have literally wet yourself the first time you read > tcp_input(). 8-) 8-). > Oh I think I have seen enough code in my overlong programming career to not be easily shocked, aesthetically offended maybe, shocked no. > My take on this is that some problems are complicated, and, due > to bad design and legacy issues, or just plain performance > requirements, end up needing complicated solutions. For these > solutions, there are a limited number of people that can deal > with maintaining or fixing that code: the set of people able to > keep that level of complexity straight in their heads long enough > to deal with the issues facing them. Well, I don't necessarily disagree with the point you are making, but this is the very reason that programmers go loopy at a young age. You know they learn to write a bubble-sort and then sudddenly they are shoved into program maintenance...Unfortunately these limited numbers of people often grow old and die, find other jobs, have nervous breakdowns, have a low ability to explain ... etc etc... > > It's not very egalitarian, I know: I'm supposed to say that "all > people are equally gifted/challenged", and then we adjust the world > so that everyone can perform at an acceptable level in all jobs, > but, frankly, that's just not true: there's some code that most > people should kee their grubby paws out of, and That's Just The > Way It Is(tm). Well, I suppose people are gifted in different ways. I can design and write programs but I can barely bang a nail in straight into a block of wood. Oh there is definitely some code not meant for normal mortals. I would hasten to add though, that the ability to design and write good programs is often not accompanied by great insights in other areas. I would name a few famous names (but I will not). Two very famous people, not related to the FreeBSD project of course, spring to mind.. :) -- Regards Cliff Sarginson The Netherlands [ This mail has been checked as virus-free ] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021123103724.GA11632>