Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!ucsd!ucbvax!CS.NIU.EDU!rickert From: rickert@CS.NIU.EDU (Neil Rickert) Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm370 Subject: Re: programming style Message-ID: <9103050151.AA17172@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 5 Mar 91 01:50:05 GMT References: <9103050128.AA16369@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: IBM 370 Assembly Programming Discussion List Distribution: inet Organization: The Internet Lines: 23 In article <9103050128.AA16369@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> you write: >Ready for a personal preference flame about assembler comments? > > C R1,FOOLOC If value is equal to FOO, > BNE NOTFOO then... > LA R2,BAR frobulate with BAR > LA R3,BAR+1 do something else BAR-related I have no real objections to this indented comment style. But if you were writing code that I had to maintain I would tell you not to waste too much time with the pretty printing of it. The fact is, if I have to look at the code closely enough to need to know the structuring, I'm probably not going to pay much attention to the comments at all. It is what is to the left of the comments that really tells you what is happening, and when push comes to shove that is what you must rely on. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940