Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #11226

Re: Curious compiler warning

From Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Curious compiler warning
Date 2012-01-11 06:58 -0800
Organization albasani.net
Message-ID <jek824$sqv$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <jeir2s$7v0$3@news.albasani.net> <jeisjs$4k4$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jeiu63$es3$1@news.albasani.net> <KUcPq.69975$Dr1.36221@newsfe08.iad> <jek2kn$i1b$1@speranza.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw


On 01/11/2012 05:25 AM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> Arved Sandstrom<asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca>  wrote:
>> On 12-01-10 11:03 PM, Lew wrote:
>>> And why does everyone insist on putting autodecrement on a separate line
>>> anyway?
>> [ SNIP ]
>
>> Lew, I do just this pretty routinely these days. All of the short forms,
>> actually, not just -- and ++. About the only place where I normally
>> leave them is in "for" control expressions; more often than not with
>> "while" and "do" loops I'll keep the modification of "index" variables
>> with incrementing/decrementing etc also in separate statements, clearly
>> commented if necessary, in the body of the loop.
>
> I agree. Write to make something readable, minimizing the thinking
> required to read and understand it.
>
> Now, there is the old C favorite:
>
>     while(*s++ = *t++) ;
>
> and that might be the only statement in the routine, in which case it
> is pretty hard to miss.
>
> For a single statement loop, and if it fits, with indending, in much
> less than an 80 column line, then I might keep it all in one line.
>
> If a loop loops better on separate lines, and it doesn't otherwise
> complicate things, increment and decrement look nicer on
> separate lines.
>
>> You won't catch me doing things like
>
>> values[--i]
>
>> or
>
>> b = (a += 3)
>
>> even.
>
>> The reason I don't do anything like this anymore is because it's not
>> just my code. And I've noted over the years that constructs like this
>> lead to defects. That's real life. People miss a nuance about when some
>> value is being modified, or even fail to note that it _is_ being
>> modified. Keeping the short-for operation on a separate line highlights
>> the fact that it is a modification.
>
> Sometimes you just have to consider each case, how it affects
> the readability.

"Readability" is such a subjective term.  Someone who knows C, C++, C#, Java 
or certain other languages might find 'x[i++] = y[j++]" perfectly readable. 
Someone not familiar with these programming languages might not.

If your observation that such expressions has any evidence to back it up it's 
a good argument for something.  Maybe not for changing the potency of the 
auto-inc/decrement operator but for hiring better-trained programmers, but for 
something.  Assuming the evidence sustains the observation.

If you have a hard time understanding that expression and you call yourself a 
Java programmer, there's a disconnect.

-- 
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Curious compiler warning Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-01-11 01:51 +0000
  Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-10 18:10 -0800
    Re: Curious compiler warning glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-11 02:36 +0000
      Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-10 19:03 -0800
        Re: Curious compiler warning glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-11 07:50 +0000
          Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-10 23:57 -0800
        Re: Curious compiler warning Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-01-11 05:47 -0400
          Re: Curious compiler warning glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-11 13:25 +0000
            Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-11 06:58 -0800
              Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-11 07:01 -0800
              Re: Curious compiler warning Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-01-11 10:03 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-11 23:30 -0800
              Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-11 18:10 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-11 23:32 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-01-12 01:44 -0600
                Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 07:42 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-01-12 10:51 -0600
                Re: Curious compiler warning Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-01-12 07:50 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-01-12 10:54 -0600
                Re: Curious compiler warning Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-21 12:52 +0100
                Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-12 11:51 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 20:58 -0800
        Re: Curious compiler warning "Gavino" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-11 20:05 +0100
          Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 07:47 -0800
        Re: Curious compiler warning Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-21 12:52 +0100
          Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-21 12:13 -0800
    Re: Curious compiler warning Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-01-11 04:55 +0000
      Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-10 21:46 -0800
      Re: Curious compiler warning glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-11 07:55 +0000
      Re: Curious compiler warning Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-01-11 01:35 -0800
        Re: Curious compiler warning "Gavino" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-11 20:05 +0100
          Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-11 18:18 -0800
            Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 07:55 -0800
              Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-12 11:59 -0800
            Re: Curious compiler warning Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-01-13 00:02 +0000
              Re: Curious compiler warning Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-01-12 16:11 -0800
                Re: Curious compiler warning Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-01-13 01:31 +0000
          Re: Curious compiler warning Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-01-11 18:26 -0800
            Re: Curious compiler warning Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-01-11 19:01 -0800
              Re: Curious compiler warning Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-01-11 23:23 -0500
                Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 08:00 -0800
            Re: Curious compiler warning Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-21 12:52 +0100
          Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 07:50 -0800
        Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-11 18:14 -0800
          Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 08:05 -0800
            Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-12 12:02 -0800
  Re: Curious compiler warning Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-01-10 21:11 -0500
    Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-10 18:17 -0800
    Re: Curious compiler warning bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2012-01-11 16:10 +0000
    Re: Curious compiler warning Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-01-11 20:45 +0100
      Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 08:09 -0800
      Re: Curious compiler warning Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@ling.helsinki.fi> - 2012-01-12 18:14 +0200
      Re: Curious compiler warning Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-21 12:52 +0100
      Re: Curious compiler warning David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-01-21 09:12 -0500
    Re: Curious compiler warning Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-11 18:21 -0800
    Re: Curious compiler warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-01-12 08:08 -0800
  Re: Eclipse 3.7.1 compiler warning v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2012-01-11 21:10 +0000

csiph-web