Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site hammer.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!tektronix!orca!hammer!seifert
From: seifert@hammer.UUCP (Snoopy)
Newsgroups: net.singles,net.cse
Subject: Re: portable code
Message-ID: <1855@hammer.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Mar-86 13:21:52 EST
Article-I.D.: hammer.1855
Posted: Thu Mar 13 13:21:52 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Mar-86 20:34:46 EST
References: <653@moscom.UUCP> <569@hoptoad.uucp> <11569@watnot.UUCP> <1087@burl.UUCP> <1097@bunker.UUCP>
Reply-To: tekecs!doghouse.TEK!snoopy (Snoopy)
Organization: The Daisy Hill Puppy Farm
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.singles:10957 net.cse:756

In article <1097@bunker.UUCP> garys@bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) writes:
>
>(Pet peeve: Many people seem to think that assembly language is
>inherently unreadable -- this is nonsense.  Good code can be
>written in assembly, and bad code can be written in C.)
...
>I cringe when I see comments like that, too; but in the case where
>someone has inherited someone else's trashy code, putting a warning
>like that in is better than nothing.  Eventually, it should be replaced
>when (if) someone figures out why the code is there.

I've seen some pretty horrible "spagetti code" written in C.
Function calls can be as bad as gotos.

How can the schools teach students about the real world?  Easy,
just give them a real world assignment:  Give them a piece of
poorly written, uncommented, code and have them debug it.

Snoopy
tektronix!tekecs!doghouse.TEK!snoopy