Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Richard Heathfield <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 17:11:29 +0000 (UTC)
Default User said:
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
>> No. In my experience, people in the world of professional programming
>> prefer:
>>
>> * enormous functions
>> * multiple exit points from functions and loops
>> * multiple entry points, if they can get them
>> * spaghetti logic
>> * tight coupling
>> * vry shrt var nms
>> * evnshrterfnnms
>> * low cohesion
>> * lots of debugging
>> * hardly any testing
>> * lots of maintenance
>
>
> That's not been my experience.
You've been a very lucky chap. (And, on occasion, so have I.)
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
Email rjh at the above domain
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Default User
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- References:
- while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Michael B Allen
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Alan Balmer
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Christopher Benson-Manica
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- From: Default User
- while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Prev by Date: Re: low-level question
- Next by Date: Re: Why C/C++ errors are SO obscure/devious??
- Previous by thread: Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Next by thread: Re: while (1) vs. for ( ;; )
- Index(es):