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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #384441 > unrolled thread

Technical challenge for DFS

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Technical challenge for DFS Incubus <incubus9536612@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 07:18 -0800
    Re: Technical challenge for DFS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-12-16 11:32 -0500
      Re: Technical challenge for DFS DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-12-16 11:37 -0500
      Re: Technical challenge for DFS Incubus <incubus9536612@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 08:50 -0800
      Re: Technical challenge for DFS Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 09:32 -0800
    Loop(100) Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-17 12:34 -0800
      Re: Loop(100) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-12-18 00:44 -0500
        Command Line jockies use plenty of aliases, no ? ! Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-17 21:59 -0800
      Re: Loop(100) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-19 17:20 +0000
        I don't worry about "optimizations", don't need to. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-19 10:56 -0800
          Re: I don't worry about "optimizations", don't need to. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-12-19 11:23 -0800
          Re: I don't worry about "optimizations", don't need to. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-20 12:30 +0000
            Other people's code is hard to learn/modify. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-20 06:06 -0800
              Re: Other people's code is hard to learn/modify. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-20 15:31 +0100
                Re: Other people's code is hard to learn/modify. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-20 09:04 -0600
              Re: Other people's code is hard to learn/modify. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-20 15:06 +0000
                What The Fuck is wrong with your peers ? ! Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-20 09:59 -0800
                  Re: What The Fuck is wrong with your peers ? ! moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-20 23:22 +0000
                    I won, bigly. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-20 16:15 -0800
                      Re: I won, bigly. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-12-21 00:01 -0500
                        AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-21 02:55 -0800
                          Re: AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-21 14:33 +0100
                          Re: AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-22 03:21 +0000
                            My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-22 02:36 -0800
                              Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-22 21:22 +0000
                                Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-23 07:54 -0600
                                  Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> - 2016-12-23 09:35 -0500
                                    Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-12-23 08:46 -0600
                                    Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-23 16:21 +0000
                                      My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-23 08:52 -0800
                                        Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-23 19:12 +0000
                                          Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-23 13:27 -0600
                                            Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-23 20:56 +0100
                                              Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-12-23 13:32 -0700
                                                Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-23 22:40 +0100
                                                  Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-12-23 15:19 -0700
                                                    Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 14:30 -0800
                                                  My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ). Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-23 17:06 -0800
                                                    Re: My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ). Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-24 10:40 +0100
                                              Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-12-24 14:04 +0000
                                  Someday, if you're lucky, you'll know the freedoms I enjoy. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-23 08:05 -0800
                                  Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-12-23 13:49 -0700
                      Re: I won, bigly. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-12-21 09:09 -0500
                      Re: I won, bigly. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-21 17:37 -0500
                    Re: What The Fuck is wrong with your peers ? ! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-21 07:14 -0600

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#385463 — AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints.

You ( Mr. DFS ) replied ( to me ):
> > My code was challenged by old school ( FORTRAN ) professors
> > and young, high priced, programmers from MicroSoft's Visual Studio team.
> >
> > They all lost; I won, bigly.
> > I'm not bragging, it's just true.
> > If you can, try to use macros more.
> 
> It's nice to win.  What was the challenge?
> Who competed?  What were the rules?
> What was the prize?

The aforementioned people wanted shorter lines
( I like 236 columns ), auto formatted ( whitespace ),
with lots of comments.

I refused.  I insisted on _manual_ whitespace.
WhiteSpace is like a fingerprint, it's very revealing.
AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints.

They lost; I won, bigly.
I retain control of the code;
I'm still getting paid, they aren't.

My code looks like this:

  http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Visual-Studio-2015.PNG
  http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Diff.PNG
  [ Red is the old code, Green is the new stuff ]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#385473 — Re: AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints.

 wrote:

> You ( Mr. DFS ) replied ( to me ):
>> > My code was challenged by old school ( FORTRAN ) professors
>> > and young, high priced, programmers from MicroSoft's Visual Studio
>> > team.
>> >
>> > They all lost; I won, bigly.
>> > I'm not bragging, it's just true.
>> > If you can, try to use macros more.
>> 
>> It's nice to win.  What was the challenge?
>> Who competed?  What were the rules?
>> What was the prize?
> 
> The aforementioned people wanted shorter lines
> ( I like 236 columns ), auto formatted ( whitespace ),
> with lots of comments.
> 
> I refused.  I insisted on _manual_ whitespace.
> WhiteSpace is like a fingerprint, it's very revealing.
> AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints.
> 
> They lost; I won, bigly.
> I retain control of the code;
> I'm still getting paid, they aren't.
> 
> My code looks like this:
> 
>   http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Visual-Studio-2015.PNG
>   http://Jeff-Relf.Me/Diff.PNG
>   [ Red is the old code, Green is the new stuff ]

And the sad reality is that you are even proud of that extremely shitty 
"code". The good thing is that usually "programmers" like you code only for 
themselves. Nobody in his right mind would employ such a dimbulb

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#385746 — Re: AutoFormatting hides the fingerprints.

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:

>You ( Mr. DFS ) replied ( to me ):
>> > My code was challenged by old school ( FORTRAN ) professors
>> > and young, high priced, programmers from MicroSoft's Visual Studio team.
>> >
>> > They all lost; I won, bigly.
>> > I'm not bragging, it's just true.
>> > If you can, try to use macros more.

I use macros where appropriate.

I don't use stupid macros (nor could I, except in my own code).

>> It's nice to win.  What was the challenge?
>> Who competed?  What were the rules?
>> What was the prize?

>The aforementioned people wanted shorter lines
>( I like 236 columns ), auto formatted ( whitespace ),
>with lots of comments.

Ewww...  all that makes it so hard to follow.  One statement per line,
with a sane line length.  Proper whitespace (including indentation where
appropriate breaks things up so it's readable, a solid mass of characters.
Comments tell the next guy what you are doing and why/how.  Old macro code
I see typically has one comment per instruction/macro call, on the right
side.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#385783 — My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

You ( Michael Moroney ) replied ( to me ):
> > The aforementioned people wanted shorter lines
> > ( I like 236 columns ), auto formatted ( whitespace ),
> > with lots of comments.
> 
> Ewww...  all that makes it so hard to follow.  
> One statement per line, with a sane line length.  
> 
> Proper whitespace ( including indentation where appropriate ) 
> breaks things up so it's readable, not a solid mass of characters.
> 
> Comments tell the next guy what you are doing and why/how.  
> Old macro code I see typically has 
> one comment per instruction/macro call, on the right side.

I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:

  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.

I won the day; I retained control; I get paid -- They lost.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#385929 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:

>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:

>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.

>I won the day; I retained control; I get paid -- They lost.

Peer code review works very well here. Sometimes a bug gets
found the original author missed.  The maintainability/
legibility get checked if necessarily, since it is
expected that someday, someone else (perhaps one of them)
may have to maintain it.

"Dense code" is for executable files, the output of compilers
and linkers.  Source code exists for humans as few humans
ever write in the machine language of the target computer,
humans use computer languages.

Again, code for your own use or one-offs that aren't part
of the product can be anything, but professional coders
write with future maintainability in mind.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386055 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Michael Moroney wrote:

> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>
>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>
>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.

How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.

>>I won the day; I retained control; I get paid -- They lost.

You're a sociopath.

>Peer code review works very well here. Sometimes a bug gets
>found the original author missed.  The maintainability/
>legibility get checked if necessarily, since it is
>expected that someday, someone else (perhaps one of them)
>may have to maintain it.
>
>"Dense code" is for executable files, the output of compilers
>and linkers.  Source code exists for humans as few humans
>ever write in the machine language of the target computer,
>humans use computer languages.
>
>Again, code for your own use or one-offs that aren't part
>of the product can be anything, but professional coders
>write with future maintainability in mind.

He's had all this explained before.  You may as well be talking to a
brick wall.

-- 
"I'd estimate 95% of all kernel + GNU + enduser code was written for
free by hobbyists."  -  DumFSck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386058 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:54:55 -0600, chrisv wrote:

> Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>
>>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>>
>>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.
> 
> How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.

Is that what he is posting?
40Tude displays fonts so small I need a magnifying glass to read it.
When I was playing with slrn the other day when I open his messages it
asks if I want to process a MIME article.

Weird stuff.


-- 
flatfish+++
mariana trench

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386061 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

On 2016-12-23, flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:54:55 -0600, chrisv wrote:
>
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>
>>>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>>>
>>>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.
>> 
>> How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.
>
> Is that what he is posting?
> 40Tude displays fonts so small I need a magnifying glass to read it.
> When I was playing with slrn the other day when I open his messages it
> asks if I want to process a MIME article.
>
> Weird stuff.

:r !grep -i mime .slrnrc

%% 6. Character mapping / MIME support
% If non-zero, call metamail for MIME formats slrn cannot handle.

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386068 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> writes:

>On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:54:55 -0600, chrisv wrote:

>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>
>>>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>>>
>>>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.
>> 
>> How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.

>Is that what he is posting?
>40Tude displays fonts so small I need a magnifying glass to read it.
>When I was playing with slrn the other day when I open his messages it
>asks if I want to process a MIME article.

>Weird stuff.

yeah, that's one of his obsessions, HTML to Usenet (usually with a fugly
font).

it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.

He'd never make the cut here.

Too bad (for him), we may be doing some UTF-8 related work in a little
while.  (UTF-8 is another of Relfie's obsessions)
I may wind up getting some of it...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386070 — My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

You ( Michael Moroney ) said I have to:
> disable a zillion compiler warnings

I turn on _all_ warnings, then I turn off
the "level 4" warnings that are _worse_ than useless
( they get in the way ).

> He'd never make the cut here.

You don't offer me anything worth taking, sorry.
I've got two jobs and plenty of money; I don't get fired.
I've held my current programming job ever since 1993.

> We/I may be doing some UTF-8 related work in a little while.

Welcome to the 21st century.

When I address someone who uses a terminal-based newsreader,
-- like slrn, tin or nn -- I (usually) post PlainText.
Same for ForteAgent and 40tudeDialog users.

When I address GoogleGroups and/or MozillaThunderBird users;
I post simple subset of "Text/HTM" because, otherwise,
a proportional font would be used, and WhiteSpace would be altered.

The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
Smarter newsreaders, including slrn, use other fonts too,
depending on the glyph.

Personally, I use "OCR A", "MS Mincho", "Segoe UI Symbol", 
"DejaVu LGC Sans Mono" and "nSimSun" -- all "Console" fonts, 
MonoSpaced ( some are double wide ).  Depends on the glyph.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386090 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:

>You ( Michael Moroney ) said I have to:
>> disable a zillion compiler warnings

>I turn on _all_ warnings, then I turn off
>the "level 4" warnings that are _worse_ than useless
>( they get in the way ).

Most of the time it means your code is mildly fsck'ed in some
way that the compiler figured out for you. You should fix or
remove the broken code.

>> He'd never make the cut here.

>You don't offer me anything worth taking, sorry.

I'm not trying to offer anything, just stating that you
simply couldn't make it here.  "Doesn't play well with others."

>When I address GoogleGroups and/or MozillaThunderBird users;
>I post simple subset of "Text/HTM" because, otherwise,
>a proportional font would be used, and WhiteSpace would be altered.

You don't know how they have their browser configured. Besides,
Google Groups is broken. The default for Usenet is fixed width
fonts, probably except for flowing text.

>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.

Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
humans?  Again, those who care configure their newsreader to
use the best font for them.  But nobody but you and the (now
quite rare) spammers use HTML on Usenet anyway.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386093 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Michael Moroney wrote:

> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>
>>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>
>Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>humans?

Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
read".

-- 
"Peter the Klöwn and you both claimed that a 286 couldn't address more
than 1MB."  -  "Slimer", lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386098 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

chrisv wrote:

> Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>
>>>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>
>>Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>humans?
> 
> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
> read".
> 

The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any 
circumstances

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386105 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
> 
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>> 
>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>> 
>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>> humans?
>> 
>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>> read".
>> 
> 
> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
> circumstances

Would love for you to show how to do it right.



-- 
"When making pornography involves real abuse of real children ... that does
not excuse censorship. No matter how disgusting published works might be,
censorship is more disgusting." -- Richard Stallman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386144 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:

> On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
>> chrisv wrote:
>> 
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>>> 
>>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>>> humans?
>>> 
>>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>>> read".
>>> 
>> 
>> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
>> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
>> circumstances
> 
> Would love for you to show how to do it right.
> 

Actually, there are guidelines for that. Not that you would know anything 
about that, but those exist. For a reason: The code is better readable

https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/coding-standards
https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html

Give some hints what to do and what to avoid. You should not look into it. 
You understand nothing

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386158 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

On 12/23/16, 2:40 PM, in article o3k5gr$c3c$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
> 
>> On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>>>> humans?
>>>> 
>>>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>>>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>>>> read".
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
>>> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
>>> circumstances
>> 
>> Would love for you to show how to do it right.
>> 
> 
> Actually, there are guidelines for that. Not that you would know anything
> about that, but those exist. For a reason: The code is better readable
> 
> https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/coding-standards
> https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html
> 
> Give some hints what to do and what to avoid. You should not look into it.
> You understand nothing

Interesting at your level of understanding you would interpret my request as
one to point to coding standards. I can see that from someone who has no
clue what coding even means. I am always amazed at how lost you are. Anyway,
the idea was to have you show some of YOUR code... but you don't have any to
show. No big deal. 


-- 
"I started Linux as a desktop operating system. And it's the only area
where Linux hasn't completely taken over. That just annoys the hell out
of me." -- Linus Torvalds

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386161 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 3:19:26 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote:
> On 12/23/16, 2:40 PM, in article o3k5gr$c3c$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
> > The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
> > 
> >> On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
> >> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> chrisv wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
> >>>>> humans?
> >>>> 
> >>>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
> >>>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
> >>>> read".
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
> >>> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
> >>> circumstances
> >> 
> >> Would love for you to show how to do it right.
> >> 
> > 
> > Actually, there are guidelines for that. Not that you would know anything
> > about that, but those exist. For a reason: The code is better readable
> > 
> > https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/coding-standards
> > https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html
> > 
> > Give some hints what to do and what to avoid. You should not look into it.
> > You understand nothing
> 
> Interesting at your level of understanding you would interpret my request as
> one to point to coding standards.

Why *wouldn't* he point to those things? There's a reason they exist, fool.

> I can see that from someone who has no
> clue what coding even means.

If so, then they had just proven they know more about the topic than you do ;)

> I am always amazed at how lost you are. Anyway,
> the idea was to have you show some of YOUR code... but you don't have any to
> show. No big deal. 

LOL! Like you'd have clue one differentiating between their code. Go crack a pipe, Snit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386170 — My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ).

My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ):

1. If everything ( but the top node ) were local,
   then you'd be spending all your time traversing trees,
   like an ant, instead of doing real work.

   So use Global Variables/Functions early and often.
   This, the common way, is ambiguous:

     if ( HandleEvents(1) ) ...

   Instead, use globals (below), like this:

     WaitForClick = 1, HandleEvents();  if ( Click ) ...

   Globals:

     int WaitForClick, Click ;

     void HandleEvents() { MSG  Msg ;
       GetMsg:   PeekMessage( &Msg, 0, 0, 0, PM_REMOVE );
       Click = Msg.message == WM_LBUTTONDOWN ;
       //  Handle system events, like WM_NCACTIVATE...  Blah Blah.

       //  When WaitForClick == 1, Exit if-and-only-if there's a Click:
       if ( Click || !WaitForClick  ) { WaitForClick = 0 ;  return ;   }

       //  Draw Stuff... Blah Blah.
       goto GetMsg ;  }

2. InLine Conditionals ( Bool ? True() : False() ) are nice and concise.
   For example:

     inline  int  TheSmaller( int X, int Y ) { return X < Y ? X : Y ;  }

     #define  FlagTheNym   /*  'V' is for Visitor. */  \
        Nym.Trusted ? 'T' : Nym.Dropped ? 'D' : Nym.Kid ? 'K' : Nym.Adult ? 'A' : 'V'

3. Simplify Odd system calls, like this:

     wchar  aString[999];
     Str( aString, L"A 32 bit, unsigned Random Integer: %I64d", Rand32 );

     Globals:

       typedef wchar_t  wchar ;
       unsigned int  uiRand ;  
       #define  Rand32 ( rand_s( &uiRand ), uiRand )  //  Seeding is implicit.
       #define  Str  swprintf  //  Print to a Unicode string, "printf" style.

4. A variable's declared type isn't always appropriate; so Type Cast.

     #define  szStr  (int)wcslen  //  Return the length of a Unicode string.

     #define  Zero( X )  memset( & X, 0, sizeof X )  //  Implicit cast to (void*).

     Zero( aStruct );

5. Create fewer/larger functions.
   Put everything in a single, large .CPP file -- don't create .H files.

6. Local, ShortTerm variables are nice.  Like:

     wchar _T[999], *P = _T ;

     Loop(3) { _Loop(4) P += Str( P, L"( %d, %d )%s", J, JJ, J == eJ ? L"\n" :  L" " );  }

     printf( _T );

     Globals:

       #define   Loop( N )  int         eJ = ( N ) - 1, J = -1 ; while ( ++J <= eJ )
       #define  _Loop( N )  int JJ = J, eJ = ( N ) - 1, J = -1 ; while ( ++J <= eJ )
       #define  Str  swprintf
       typedef  wchar_t  wchar ;

     Output:

       ( 0, 0 ) ( 1, 0 ) ( 2, 0 ) ( 3, 0 )
       ( 0, 1 ) ( 1, 1 ) ( 2, 1 ) ( 3, 1 )
       ( 0, 2 ) ( 1, 2 ) ( 2, 2 ) ( 3, 2 )

See X.CPP in "Jeff-Relf.Me/X.ZIP". 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386177 — Re: My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ).

 wrote:

> My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ):
> 

Yes, we know. Shitty beyond belief

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386178 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
>
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>>
>>>>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>>
>>>Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>>humans?
>>
>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>> read".
>>
>
> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
> circumstances

Has the meaning of the term "dense" changed in the computing biz?

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web