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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10ad19,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10ad19,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 107a89,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid107a89,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-05 07:45:26 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!psinet-france!psiuk-f4!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.clarion,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml Subject: Re: Long names are doom ? Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:28:04 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9fiq9n$3ka$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <83WP6.3874$yc6.728572@news.xtra.co.nz> <3B1411D0.3AAF42E7@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> <9f2nks$ibd$0@dosa.alt.net> <3B177EF7.2A2470F4@facilnet.es> <9f8b7b$h0e$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9f8r0i$lu3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9fgagu$6ae$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.170.200.133 X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 991751287 3722 136.170.200.133 (5 Jun 2001 14:28:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Jun 2001 14:28:07 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8163 comp.lang.awk:2771 comp.lang.clarion:21109 comp.lang.java.programmer:73700 comp.lang.pl1:766 comp.lang.vrml:3498 Date: 2001-06-05T14:28:07+00:00 List-Id: If you like maintainability - you probably want to look seriously at Ada. That was one of the design goals of the language. There are lots of examples on the net of well structured Ada code that I believe illustrate how it can be used to develop more easily maintained systems. (I like to think the code on my web page is very readable & maintainable. Take a look at some of it at: http://www.mcondic.com/ There are plenty of other examples & a good place to start is at http://www.adapower.org/) I'd have to disagree on the notion that "terseness" in and of itself is somehow going to contribute to clarity & maintainability. In my experience, what counts much more is clarity of thought in the original design, a logical breakdown of the problem into pieces, meaningful expression of the design in the language of implementation (good names, comments, obvious flow, etc.) and support from the environment for error detection and correction. If expressing something in as few keystrokes as possible were somehow going to lead to maintainability, then the answer would have been things like APL - or even machine code. (Not many characters needed to represent hex digits, right?) If "terseness" is really another word for "abstraction" then I might be inclined to agree. Saying in your code something like: Quick_Sort (Some_Array) ; is obviously easier to understand than spelling out in great detail the entire Quick Sort algorithm. Here the "terseness" is a way of saying "There is this highly complex operation of sorting an array that you don't need to bother trying to understand. Trust me. When I get back from the call, your whole array will be sorted." That sort of "terseness" I'd concede helps with maintenance - but I think it is more aptly named "Abstraction" or "Functional Independence". MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Roedy Green" wrote in message news:q81pht43ib89sjop0i245bvs502416t1tp@4ax.com... > On 4 Jun 2001 22:27:23 -0500, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry > Kilgallen) wrote or quoted : > > >Since these are both your work, I think a more open statement than > >"There is a general rule" would have been "I have a general rule". > > Being dreadfully modest, I doubt there are few other people in the > world who, when they can't fall asleep at night worry about why the > world's computer programs are not maintainable. It has been a bit of > an obsession of mine for a long time, going back before some of you > were born. I have done quite a bit of experimenting trying to find > out what makes programs maintainable and unmaintainable. Few others > in the known universe have come near the number of posts I have done > preaching the gospel of maintainability and the path to true > salvation. > > Even the esteemed Bruce Eckel said I should write a book on the topic. > > > For more detail, please look up the key words mentioned in this post in > the Java Glossary at: http://mindprod.com/gloss.html > If you don't see what you were looking for, complain! > or send your contribution for the glossary. > > -- > Roedy Green, Canadian Mind Products > Custom computer programming since 1963. Ready to take on new work.