Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: a style question
Message-ID: <14369@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 7 Nov 90 09:39:10 GMT
References: <443@mole-end.UUCP> <1990Oct23.160116.10299@athena.mit.edu> <13@christmas.UUCP>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 26

In article <13@christmas.UUCP> rtm@island.uu.net (Richard Minner) writes:
>My question is why is so little of the code I've seen `neat' in appearance?

Often, because it was written by amateurs, or at any rate hackers who
have not learned the magnitude of the maintenance problem for production
software.

>I really am just curious why this seems to be so uncommon.

I don't know; where do you obtain the code?
Several programmers around here have gravitated into similar styles,
wherein visual alignment of related things is carefully maintained.
While this seems like too much work to a novice, it pays off since,
once you're accustomed to it, several categories of coding error
stand out like sore thumbs.  Generally these are noticed before the
code ever reaches production, or even the first attempt at compilation.

>Is vi too hard to use?

Yes, but that has nothing to do with it.  We're happy "sam" users;
you should be too.

>Is it because `indent' and the like just mess it all up anyway?

If you have an urge to run the code through "indent", it ALREADY has
a problem.