home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter
- From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
- Subject: Re: Hardware Support for Numeric Algorithms
- Message-ID: <id.DDWU.KZ4@ferranti.com>
- Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
- References: <1992Nov6.230030.16637@leland.Stanford.EDU> <TMB.92Nov7233431@orac.idiap.ch> <BxDH7G.8Cn@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:25:48 GMT
- Lines: 26
-
- In article <BxDH7G.8Cn@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
- > Those who rewrote my code without gotos had to work to do it.
-
- Who cares?
-
- The goal, after all, isn't eliminating the gotos. It's producing maintainable
- code. The version I wrote from your code had just as many gotos (some were
- switch statements, but it's a 5 minute job to convert them all back and
- forth), but it was a lot more readable and maintainable. And I probably spent
- less time on it than you spent on the code in the first place.
-
- Frankly, your coding style as we've seen it on the net is so bad nobody can
- take seriously any claim that minor syntax changes will make an atom of
- difference to your productivity.
-
- You're like someone who's been driving power boats around all his life, and
- has no feel for the water. You need to do some sailing... sure, it's not
- directly productive time, but neither is flaming on the net. Go, spend some
- time learning how to write readable code and then come back. You'll be able
- to explain things a lot better, and maybe make your point effectively enough
- that people understand.
- --
- Peter da Silva / 77487-5012 USA / +1 713 274 5180
- true(<<VV$@\\$'&O 9$O%'$LT$&$"V6"$&$<4$?'&$ #I&&?$=$<<@)24 24 scale 3 21 moveto
- {dup 36 eq{pop not}{dup 7 and 4 sub exch 56 and 8 div 4 sub 2 index{rlineto}{
- rmoveto}ifelse}ifelse}forall stroke pop showpage % Har du kramat din varg idag?
-