Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!brolga!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!qut.edu.au!thomas
From: thomas@qut.edu.au
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Readability
Message-ID: <1991Apr19.124928.27417@qut.edu.au>
Date: 19 Apr 91 17:49:28 GMT
References: <jls.671858932@rutabaga>
Organization: Queensland University of Technology
Lines: 26

In article <jls.671858932@rutabaga>, jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) writes:
> 2) The history of software engineering has been more profoundly warped
>    by the simple fact that most programmers are only hunt-and-peck
>    typists than by anything else. This explains constricted identifier
>    names and an emphasis on notational compaction at the expense of
>    understandability.
> 
>    Corollary: the term "verbose", applied to a programming language,
>    is COMPLIMENTARY, not perjorative.

I AM NOT entering the language wars!!! (Please re-read the previous sentence.)
I personally have problems with both C (C++) and Ada.

I disagree greatly with the above stated corollary.  Verbose programs (not
languages) are as unreadable as terse programs.  I will trash a student's
assignment more harshly if it is overly verbose rather than if it is too
terse.  The key to maintainability is CONCISE and COMPLETE documentation.
Verbosity just frustrates the maintainer and usually causes them to skip
over the code rather than reading it.

Au revoir,

@~~Richard Thomas  aka. The AppleByter  --  The Misplaced Canadian~~~~@
{ AARNet: richard@water.fit.qut.edu.au  InterNet: R.Thomas@qut.edu.au }
{ PSI:    PSI%505272223015::R.Thomas                                  }
@~~School of Computing Science - Queensland University of Technology~~@