Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Regarding assignment to struct Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 04:40:34 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 39 Message-ID: <86cy46sn99.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <86plgo7ahu.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20250505111213.00004b55@yahoo.com> <20250505120145.000014f8@yahoo.com> <87jz6uhkgo.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <_jtSP.16069$v2h6.13921@fx14.iad> <1019l3t$3rqk1$6@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 12:40:37 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a7f5d1e51a9a8827e6b0e0c25bf5c54b"; logging-data="3669021"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+lSo5nDaYPldUuZbUFTtwEI17xNkXsLPQ=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:OIiXe3g59Q18XsiLOQYZ0o3Uvfw= sha1:QyoOl9Tqvve/O+DFolcEjBrJmjc= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:395883 Andrey Tarasevich writes: > On Wed 5/7/2025 12:37 AM, David Brown wrote: > >>> That would get an immediate downcheck during review for exactly >>> that reason. >> >> Of course. In fact, if someone presented such code for review (and >> assuming I noticed the commas!) I'd have to consider whether it was >> done maliciously, intentionally deceptively, due to incompetence, or >> smart- > arse coding. In all my C coding experience, I can't recall >> ever coming across a single situation when I thought the use of the >> comma operator was appropriate in the kind of code I work with. > > Wow! That's catastrophically bad. > > As it has been stated many times before, both C and C++ are > programming languages that embrace both statement-level and > expression-level programming. Expression-level programming > (e.g. where ?:` is used for branching and `,` for sequencing) is a > very valuable and massively important programming paradigm in these > languages. The fact that elaborate expression-level programming is > not in nay way abandoned or shunned today is pretty obvious in C++, > since C++ took major steps lately to develop its expression-level > capabilities. But it has always been and will always remain > important in C as well. > > The proclivity to stick exclusively to statement-level programming > in C and, God forbid, impose it in others through so called "code > reviews"... that would be a trait specific to "sweatshop" > development outfits, which strive to replace quality with quantity. > I'd agree that in a revolving door employment environment relying on > a large number of low-competence developers such code might be seen > as "too confusing". But I don't see why we should set our standards > that low here, in `comp.lang.c`. What's interesting is that the arguments given opposing what might be called expression-level programming have been sociological rather than technical.