Re: code portability
- From: rlb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Bos)
- Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:01:48 GMT
Keith Thompson <kst-u@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Frederick Gotham <fgothamNO@xxxxxxxx> writes:
Here's a few things which a variable can be:
unsigned
volatile
static
Just like my "smoot, yellow, painted, big wall", I don't care what order
they're put in:
If you don't care, why not just do it the way everyone else does it?
Who is this mythical "everyone" you keep harping on about? The
"everyone" who always uses the same style as "everyone" else? The one,
golden, omnipotent, omnipresent, sacrosanct C style?
If you read code that does not come from your own shop, you _are_ going
to encounter different styles of coding. Many of them are a lot less
consistent than Frederick's. And contrary to the assertions made in this
thread, it is not unfamiliarity which makes code hard to read - not for
longer than five minutes - it is inconsistency. I can easily read any
reasonably laid-out code, even if it's different from mine. The problems
start when a coder starts mixing styles at random.
Richard
.
- References:
- Re: code portability
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Al Balmer
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Al Balmer
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Ian Collins
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Al Balmer
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Philip Potter
- Re: code portability
- From: Frederick Gotham
- Re: code portability
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: code portability
- Prev by Date: Re: code portability
- Next by Date: Re: access struct member fields dynamically
- Previous by thread: Re: code portability
- Next by thread: Re: code portability
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|