Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!dftsrv!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Coding Standards.
Message-ID: <28387@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 7 Dec 90 19:44:53 GMT
References: <2055.27469abd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> <1990Dec7.163617.10916@athena.mit.edu>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 36

In article <1990Dec7.163617.10916@athena.mit.edu> scs@adam.mit.edu
(Steve Summit) writes:
>Not to argue with you, but just to present an opposing
>viewpoint, I've always felt that "} /* end if */" and the like
>make code look like it was written by amateurs who are still
>shaky on mere syntactic details.

I dunno, this sounds like argument to me :-) .  Seriously, though,
I agree; I have been known to delete all such comments from some bit
of source before working on it:

>Comments like /* end of ^C special case */ or /* end of argument
>parsing loop */ could be useful.

I much prefer what might be called `conversational' comments, as in:

	/*
	 * Read giffgaff from the user until the fire alarm goes off
	 * or we run out of sand grains, whichever comes first.
	 */
		.
		.
		.
				}
			}
			/*
			 * All of the sand grains were taken care of
			 * above, so the only thing we have to worry
			 * about here is the fire alarm.
			 */
			.
			.
			.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@cs.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris