From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,f292779560fb8442 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,af40e09e753872c X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 10db24,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: f8c65,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gidf8c65,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1008e3,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1008e3,public From: z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (Ralph Silverman) Subject: Re: Hungarian notation Date: 1996/06/05 Message-ID: <4p4319$e10@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 158591540 references: <31999F43.41C67EA6@scn.de> <4o07o9$rfu@seagoon.newcastle.edu.au> <4o1vo3$p2a@news1.ni.net> <4oehnp$onn@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> <4om4km$est@news3.cts.com> organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Broward newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.modula2,comp.edu,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1996-06-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Will Rose (cwr@cts.com) wrote: : Richard A. O'Keefe (ok@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU) wrote: : : bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) writes: : : >P.P.S. My take on comments is: Comment (only) where necessary. Whenever : : >you can express some fact in the programming language, it's better to do : : >that than to write a comment. : : I like reducing things to slogans. : : I haven't been able to come up with a good one for this. : : What I say is : : "Your comments should tell a human reader precisely the : : things s/he needs to understand the purpose and operation : : of the module but are not obvious from the code." : : This is the right stuff, but it needs to be said better. : : Can anyone come up with a really memorable way of expressing this? : "Comment at one level above the code" - trouble is, this is a bit : cryptic and needs a comment to explain it... : : >Any time you feel the need to write a : : >comment, that's a failure of the programming language -- it can't : : >express what you need to say. : : I don't know that I agree with this. How can the code make it clear : : why you chose *not* to do something? How does the code describe : : the space of possible tradeoffs from which you selected this particular : : point and why? : I strongly disagree with the 'failure of the language' argument; I tend : to write comments at an intermediate level between the code and the : reader. Obviously the code is written as clearly as possible, since : I have to debug it, but above that level it's handy to have reminders : of just what in the world is going on in a broader sense, and why. : The next level above comments is probably the manual, but that seldom : gets written. : Will : cwr@crash.cts.com -- ************begin r.s. response*************** let us go back to the beginning... why are there high level programming languages ? because humans do not think in binary code as do computers! therefore a tension sill is found in such languages, in that these must mediate this disparity. if too great a demand is placed on a programming language regarding 'human friendly' might this not result in limitation of the usefulness of the language for programming? particularly where skilled programmers are involved? ************end r.s. response***************** Ralph Silverman z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us