Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Overuse of 'auto'
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 14:45:49 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <87o7ryuo9u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <tmslfi$h09$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tn9dt7$2fnt5$1@dont-email.me> <tn9jke$8op$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tn9mjl$1oie$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tna7es$cmi$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tnbq47$hvq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tnc5cu$sjd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <tncfh6$1imt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <539f793b-c112-4d35-a907-64351d1e2835n@googlegroups.com> <tnp7v4$1uqg$1@gioia.aioe.org> <f912e031-dd85-49b7-aeef-a11cee31d17dn@googlegroups.com> <tnq1gr$8a3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <043c4a79-2f9b-4c37-9383-481dd6f3dbc2n@googlegroups.com> <tns8l8$1hck$1@gioia.aioe.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="b0c36667ceca199949af0c336901b51b"; logging-data="756764"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18EkBjKkQvljMGY8H8KrRw8DA5Tc9KnnJk="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EknmFtMu+m9QB3ek3GmkRPnrrwk= sha1:u6K5TjEas39+0viOfV2T9fv0oHg=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.48523167e832c77de7c3.20221220144549GMT.87o7ryuo9u.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:88135

Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes:

> Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> wrote:
>> On Monday, 19 December 2022 at 17:55:23 UTC+2, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>>> Öö Tiib <oot...@hot.ee> wrote: 
>>> > So your good example is: 
>>> > for(size_t image_index = 0; image_index < images.size(); ++image_index) 
>>> > Lot easier than with "i"?
>>> Easier to read and understand, yes. Absolutely. 
>>> 
>>> The longer the loop body, the more it helps. If there are nested loops, 
>>> it helps even more. (Conversely, the longer the loop body and the 
>>> more nested loops there are, the more obscure the 'i' becomes, as it 
>>> gets buried in the code and it's harder to find and remember what 
>>> it is. Heaven forbid you mix it with 'j'. Now you are just writing 
>>> obfuscated code.) 
>>> 
>> I do not know, for me it is no problem to see that i is indexing images
>> from shorter form just with passing glance. If I somehow forget it 
>> during reading next line  (how?) then I can look again.    
>
> I'm not sure how I could convey my experience on both reading (huge
> amounts of) other people's code and writing my own code and then
> reading it months/later, and noticing how much easier it becomes
> to read when, for example, loop variables express what they are
> indexing or counting.

I suspect that part of the trouble is that people "read" code in
different ways.  From your descriptions it really seems like you do it
differently to how I do it.  If you think this might be a productive
avenue (i.e. you don't think I am just being stubborn) I'd be happy to
say more.

-- 
Ben.