Xref: utzoo alt.sources.wanted:1072 comp.sources.wanted:15758 comp.software-eng:5061
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rpi!bu.edu!wang!comm.wang.com!lws
From: lws@comm.wang.com (Lyle Seaman)
Newsgroups: alt.sources.wanted,comp.sources.wanted,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: WANTED: "C" code line counter program
Message-ID: <1991Mar14.192419.1576@comm.wang.com>
Date: 14 Mar 91 19:24:19 GMT
References: <1991Mar6.214157.18633@ntpal.uucp> <1991Mar11.182848.26693@comm.wang.com> <2969@inews.intel.com>
Organization: Wang Labs, Platform Comms.
Lines: 46

bhoughto@pima.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes:

>In article <1991Mar11.182848.26693@comm.wang.com> lws@comm.wang.com (Lyle Seaman) writes:
>>Counting semi-colons is a pretty good approach, as that counts C 
>>statements.  Lines is kind of less meaningful.  Counting '{' is 
>>an interesting one, too.

>{{{{{{{{printf("Oh, if I were a rich man... ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;\n");}}}}}}}}

Yeah, but that could just as easily be written:
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
{
printf
(
"Oh, if I were a rich man... ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;\n"
)
;
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}

So either simple approach is susceptible to intentional obfuscation
(but then, most such schemes are).  No one claimed that counting semis 
and curlies was foolproof.  You've demonstrated that it isn't.  On the
other hand, seasoned coders don't usually use ; and } to such excess.
(Yes, there are *occasional* duplicates).

However, they do usually include quite a few redundant newlines.  Comments,
preprocessor directives and white space are very common, and apparently
the original poster didn't wish to count them.  I stand by my suggestion.

-- 
Lyle 	508 967 2322  		"We have had television problems directly
lws@capybara.comm.wang.com 	 attributable to something not understandable"
Wang Labs, Lowell, MA, USA 	 - unnamed believer in poltergeists