Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!jarthur!uunet!igor!rutabaga!jls From: jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: Documenting OO Systems Message-ID: Date: 29 Mar 91 03:34:25 GMT References: <271@orbit.gtephx.UUCP> <20106@alice.att.com> <1991Mar26.191259.14470@i88.isc.com> Sender: news@Rational.COM Lines: 55 > The readability of code depends ENTIRELY on the person writing that > code, not the language itself! Some languages are prone (or allow) > bad/ugly style. Any self disciplined software engineer would not > get caught up in the "neatness of tricks" a language may offer, > which are the types of traps that cause unreadable code. I only partially agree with this. I certainly agree that a language is only as good as those who write it, but a language doesn't exist separate from a CULTURE that grows up around it. The culture that grew up around C is hackerish, undisciplined, and tends to produce code that is, indeed, indistinguishable from line noise. Hell, they even have a special C PUZZLE section in trade mags celebrating the cleverest hack of the month (this is poor instinct run amok, in my opinion). The culture that grew up around Ada from day 1 was oriented toward software engineering. That doesn't mean that it is always the case that Ada is readable and easy to maintain, or that C is always unreadable and hard to maintain...but that's certainly the smart money bet. As for C++, I am pleased by it because it offers a chance to reboot the commercial sector. I am displeased by it because the hackers who populate the C "culture" are the most likely candidates to create the C++ culture...and this bodes not well, not well at all. When teaching C++, I draw two columns on the whiteboard, one for Pro and one for Con. In the Pro column I write "Compatible with C". In the Con column I write "Compatible with C". > I'm sure Ada, NOT properly written, would look almost as ugly as > the majority of the C code of this world. But, I'm also very sure > that quality software engineers are capable of creating readable > C/C++ code (read 'properly written'). No argument. > You do say "Most C++", which leads me to believe that you have been > reading code from people of a Hacker background, and not SWE. Indeed I have. That's my concern. We need more SWE's, and SOON. > I agree (in concept) with what was said, but not in how it was stated. > The plain truth is Hackers write "line noise" type code, independent > of the language, and SW Engineers write readable code given the same > tools. We're in violent agreement here. > 2) To say Ada doesn't work is pretty bold! I never said this. Far from it--someone else I was responding to said this. Gotta love these ASCII newsreaders, yes? Where is hypertext when we need it? (waiting for fiber, probably) -- ***** DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed herein are my own, except in the realm of software engineering, in which case I've borrowed them from incredibly smart people.