Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #82243
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: That's while I love C++ over C |
| Date | 2021-11-06 12:00 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <sm5qp2$pl0$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <sm49gi$vqm$4@dont-email.me> <sm4b17$ioh$1@dont-email.me> <sm4eeq$97q$1@redfloyd.dont-email.me> <sm4fpi$hk3$1@dont-email.me> <sm5jjf$bm4$1@dont-email.me> |
On 06/11/2021 09:58, David Brown wrote: > On 06/11/2021 00:46, Bart wrote: >> On 05/11/2021 23:24, red floyd wrote: >>> On 11/5/2021 3:25 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>> On 11/5/2021 4:59 PM, Vir Campestris wrote: >> >>> [insanely ugly, unreadable, and unmaintainable code fragments redacted] >> >> You're having a laugh I think. >> >> My code fragments, /one of which was the equivalent of a C++ example/, >> originated in Algol68, usually regarded as elegant. > > We are no longer living in 1968. Even if these things were regarded as > "elegant" at that time (and I doubt it), that does not make them > appropriate today. (The /language/ Algol68 was considered elegant at > the time - that doesn't mean that any code written in it was elegant.) > > There are also widely different opinions on these kinds of things, and > widely different needs. But calling it 'insanely ugly' and 'unreadable' is extreme, and was rich coming from a C++ programmer. I found Algol68 highly inspiring and refreshing 40 years ago, but I'd only seen it beautifully typeset in textbooks. The reality is somewhat different, since that language made a rod for its own back by allowing spaces within identifiers. That meant requiring various schemes to distinguish reserved words from identifiers, such as using all-caps for the former. The result looks dreadful. However the fragments I posted didn't include those elements; they were perfectly clean examples of syntax. > I've seen code snippets and suggestions posted > here by folks like Ben, James and Keith that would immediately be > downvoted in a review for my kind of work - and I would expect they > would have a similar reaction to some things /I/ write. It doesn't mean > code is necessarily objectively bad, merely that it is not appropriate > for the requirements of that kind of coding. > Downvoted; fired; retraining... The latter sounds like something from /1984/ or /A Clockwork Orange/. Not liking code is fair enough, but to expound on what you would do to someone who wrote that code? What is the matter with people here? (And I don't even write code like that! I checked my [static] codebase for examples of conditional or multiple LHSs in an assignment, and I couldn't find any. I just implement the feature.)
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
That's while I love C++ over C Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-11-03 20:39 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-03 20:28 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-11-05 21:59 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 17:25 -0500
Re: That's while I love C++ over C red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-11-05 16:24 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-05 23:46 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Tony Oliver <guinness.tony@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 17:48 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-06 01:40 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-06 02:32 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-11-05 20:18 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-11-06 04:48 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-11-06 00:34 -0400
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 22:48 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-11-05 22:26 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-11-06 07:37 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-11-06 07:36 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Ike Naar <ike@sdf.org> - 2021-11-06 06:59 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-11-06 11:12 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-06 11:08 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-11-06 15:03 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-11-06 19:12 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-06 18:57 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-06 20:50 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-06 11:44 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-06 13:18 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-11-06 10:58 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-06 12:00 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-11-06 07:04 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-11-06 15:50 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-06 14:43 +0000
[OT] Algol68 Was: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-06 17:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Algol68 Was: That's while I love C++ over C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-06 20:16 +0000
Re: [OT] Algol68 Was: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-06 20:25 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 21:59 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 22:23 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-11-05 22:27 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-11-05 22:28 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 22:46 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-05 22:46 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-11-06 12:25 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-06 13:27 -0700
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-11-07 00:38 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-11-07 00:33 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-11-07 15:10 +0100
Re: That's while I love C++ over C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-11-08 01:47 -0500
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-11-05 23:35 +0000
Re: That's while I love C++ over C Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-11-06 07:33 +0100
csiph-web