Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.programming,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general Subject: Re: C is not a low level language Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 15:35:10 +0000 Organization: 255 software Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="7148655f55b8311554c490a6157e420a"; logging-data="7941"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Ow2NrofEAXXcG9CgiLdAs" User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M () Cancel-Lock: sha1:/bo5C+bajoqSk5jGF0eOk2A+oB0= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:141212 comp.programming:9649 alt.comp.os.windows-10:86088 In message , pyotr filipivich writes: >"Mayayana" on Sun, 24 Feb 2019 08:51:59 >-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following: >>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote >> >>| Like all programming languages, it is possible to write something that's >>| indescribably elegant, and pleasing to the eye - but, as another has >>| said, virtually impossible to understand how it works when you come back >>| to it after a while. >> >> That's a pet peeve of mine. People who think it's >>clever to shrink multiple steps into one. They sacrifice >>readability based on a misconception -- the notion >>that terse code is efficient code. That _can_ depend on the compiler; less-good ones may produce more steps for more readable code. > > And then there is obfuscated code. >> Deliberately so, you mean? I thought that was usually done by not giving access to the source code. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf You cannot simply assume someone is honest just because they are not an MP.