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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,259541b8a8a12b6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-23 10:20:06 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!204.127.161.2.MISMATCH!wn2feed!worldnet.att.net!209.249.123.233!xfer10.netnews.com!netnews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!pogner.demon.co.uk!zap!not-for-mail From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Bad coding standards - aesthetics are irrelevant Date: 23 Dec 2000 08:04:40 +0000 Organization: CodeFella Message-ID: References: <3A425B14.6B007AC1@worldnet.att.net> <3A436BD7.6CEEA6E4@hiwaay.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 977595586 nnrp-04:22801 NO-IDENT pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Dec 2000 08:04:40 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3383 Date: 2000-12-23T08:04:40+00:00 List-Id: Bruce or Tracy writes: > My_Package_Name.My_Procedure_Name (Track_Number,Meters_Till_Impact, > Seconds_Till_Impact,Azimuth,Elevation,Range,Delay_In_Seconds); > > instead of: > > My_Package_Name.My_Procedure_Name > (The_Track_Number => Track_Number, > The_Meters_From_Target => Meters_From_Targer, > The_Seconds_Till_Impact => Seconds_Till_Impact, > The_Weapon_Azimuth => Azimuth, > The_Weapon_Elevation => Elevation, > The_Weapon_DownRange => Range, ^^^^^---------------- probably not! > The_Seconds_Delay => Delay_In_Seconds); > > Some have even more arguments than this example. The coders are > very good, smart coders, they just aren't "tidy", which makes > maintenance extremely difficult, especially when you have 400-500 > lines of this kind of format in single procedure. I don't see really how you (your company) can know they are 'smart'. Slapdash is not smart. One of my mentors used to refuse to look at documents with untidy diagrams (this was in the days when the diagrams had to be drawn on the stencil by hand) on the grounds that if you couldn't be bothered to produce tidy work you probably hadn't bothered with the content either. Of course you have to be wary of the 'whited sepulchre', but in my experience incompetents don't succeed at producing them either! I noticed the 'The_Whatever' style -- this was the old Booch recommendation, I think. But even then it struck me as a desperate measure -- really you need to think about the names in the context that the subprogram must be called. Not always possible, of course!