Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxb!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Quality programming in c -- a rarity?
Message-ID: <435@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 2-Feb-85 15:13:16 EST
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.435
Posted: Sat Feb  2 15:13:16 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 6-Feb-85 04:40:50 EST
References: <443@decwrl.UUCP> <4541@ucbvax.ARPA>
Reply-To: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
Lines: 24
Summary: 

In article <4541@ucbvax.ARPA> kupfer@ucbvax.ARPA (Mike Kupfer) writes:
>> In other words, if those who write Unix utilities, surely the
>> top level of C hackers, routinely write bad code -- maybe some sort
>> of restrictions in the language are necessary to help people?
>
>Restrictions in the language (at least the ones I've seen talked about
>in this group) aren't going to force people to comment their code, nor
>will it force them to use nice long mnemonic variable names, nor will
>it keep them from writing 10-page functions (my 3 major complaints
>about the Berkeley kernel).  

Or, as I put in "fortune" for the edification of humankind:

	There will never be a programming language in which it is
	the least bit difficult to write bad code.

Also, there are a large number of readable formats for code, and forcing
you to use the same one as me would annoy you out of any language.
-- 

		Ken Arnold
=================================================================
Of COURSE we can implement your algorithm.  We've got this Turing
machine emulator...