7 Dec
2017
7 Dec
'17
9:32 p.m.
The problem is crappy programmers. Good ones will do what you guys
want and put the type in the name of the struct instance. Bad ones
will do s.size and you have no idea what "s" is. When the compiler
forced the issue the quality of the programmer didn't matter.
I'd love to live in a world of all great programmers. Unfortunately,
I don't.
On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 03:27:40PM +0000, Steve Simon wrote:
+100
> On 7 Dec 2017, at 11:50, Ralph Corderoy <ralph(a)inputplus.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Larry,
>
>> I *much* prefer sbuf.st_size than whatever.size, the former is
>> instantly a stat structure, the later is a "whatever".
>
> It's awful. :-)
> st.st_size `stutters' and that jars when reading in my head.
> If st.size isn't clear from context, then stbuf.size probably is.
> Ditto ar_hdr->uid versus hdr->ar_uid.
>
> There's a hierarchy to walking the data structure, and that should be
> represented in the identifiers. So big.little, not b.bg_little.
>
> --
> Cheers, Ralph.
> https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm