Re: Bug/Gross InEfficiency in HeathField's fgetline program

On 8 Oct 2007 at 17:38, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Not least the need to compress functionality into the fewest possible
source characters at the expense of readability and maintainability. I
recognise that a terse style is considered "cool" by some, but in my
experience it is merely expensive.

Wading through 20 lines of code that do a 4-line job in a roundabout way
can also be expensive.

I still haven't bothered to attempt to /read/ the suggested replacement
code, partly since its style discourages reading, and partly because of
its source. If, as I suspect, the OP is just a sock-puppet for the guy who
threatened to break my nose (see elsethread), I'm not terribly interested
in working out whether the functionality of his code does or does not
accurately reflect that of my own.

It's a pair of declarations, a simple return statement, and two lines of
moderately dense but completely idiomatic C. It's not like you need to
set aside a rainy afternoon to dedicate to reading it.

Actually I suspect that you've read it closely, because you'd like
nothing more than to humiliate me by pointing out a bug in it. As it's
manifestly correct, you've turned to word games instead of admitting
that your own code might, just might, admit some improvement.

And who on earth has said anything about breaking your nose? It sounds
to me like you're suffering from some form of paranoia.

.

Relevant Pages