Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 18:25:49 +0100 From: Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Code layout and debugging time Message-ID: <20030422172549.GA65023@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <444r4qmp6n.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> References: <20030422132906.GB64101@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <444r4qmp6n.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 01:12:32PM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: : Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> writes: : : > I was just reading an interesting statement in Code Complete: : : Ah. You are trying to indoctrinate yourself into Microsoft's ideas of : good practices. Thanks for warning us. Well, it was given to me by a software manager here at work. But I have been modeling my code largely after style(9). Frankly, I think my code is far more readable as a result. But in the process of surveying the source tree, as well as the rationale in this MSFT press book, I thought it raised some interesting questions. -----8<-------------- : > Doesn't this seem to contradict the idea that clear, well-formatted code : > with lots of blank lines is easier to read and understand? How could : > debugging be any different? : : No contradiction at all. It just shows that the definition of "lots : of blank lines" is somewhere below 16%. Assuming we can trust the : study (but it sounds about right to me). Sixteen percent would mean every 6 lines or so. That seems far too dense in my opinion. Even when you look at hardware drivers in the kernel, there are often only 1 or 2 lines together, separated from the rest by comments and whitespace. I just don't get how debug time would 'increase dramatically.' NOTE: Please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed. Thanks. jm -- My other computer is your windows box.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030422172549.GA65023>