Re: Style isn't always religious
- From: Tim Rentsch <txr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Aug 2005 11:24:10 -0700
rlb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Bos) writes:
> Tim Rentsch <txr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > The important thing is that he explained his metric. This
> > particular metric may be somewhat person-dependent, and you
> > might think it's not an especially good metric for measuring
> > readability, but at least we know what it is.
> >
> > The problem with the response is it doesn't counter-propose
> > a different metric. If all you say is "I don't find it
> > readable", that moves the discussion in the direction of
> > being more "religious".
>
> It does? May I remark that I find your usage of the word "religious"
> less than optimally readable?
Certainly! I use the term "religious" only because
everyone else seems to understand it. But please
feel free to suggest something better.
.
- References:
- what is difference between sizeof and strlen
- From: rahul8143
- Re: what is difference between sizeof and strlen
- From: Chris Dollin
- Style isn't always religious
- From: Tim Rentsch
- Re: Style isn't always religious
- From: Baxter
- Re: Style isn't always religious
- From: Richard Tobin
- Re: Style isn't always religious
- From: Tim Rentsch
- Re: Style isn't always religious
- From: Richard Bos
- what is difference between sizeof and strlen
- Prev by Date: Re: Why C/C++ errors are SO obscure/devious??
- Next by Date: Re: confused abt file operations
- Previous by thread: Re: Style isn't always religious
- Next by thread: Re: Style isn't always religious
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
