Re: Easily-Read C++?

[milod@netcom.com (John DiCamillo)]

perez@oldcolo.com (Carlos Perez) writes:

>John DiCamillo (milod@netcom.com) wrote:
>: perez@oldcolo.com (Carlos Perez) writes:

>: >i use 2 pgm n ada bt i chngd to oth pgm lang cuz ada usd 2 mny ltrs &
>: >evry1 thnx c s btr; i ms ada bt i cn wrt kwik now; 

>: You forgot to mention how much easier
>: it is for you to read vanity license
>: plates since you started using C.
>: All that practice with cryptically
>: abreviated variable names, you know.

>: Great post!

>In retrospect, I think I was a bit too cynical.  I apologize to the many
>competent and knowledgable C and C++ programers who do write readable
>code.

Apology accepted! ;-)

But this whole variable name length argument
is really beside the point.  (Reason: neither
language enforces or even encourages short
variable or type names.  People use certain
naming conventions because that's the way
they were taught, or because a standard is
enforced for a project.)

But there are many other aspects of program
readability.  Other people have jumped on
C++'s cryptic pure virtual notation (a wart
or at least a very bad pun) and its mostly
hideous declaration style (inherited from C).
Another place where readability suffers is
inside class templates (generics).  This
problem is partly due to templates being
hurried into the language without adequate
testing.

But even given all that, I still like C++
syntax because it is concise.  This allows
me to read unfamiliar code more quickly, and
to establish a mental schema for the abstrac-
tions more quickly.  Eiffel provides this
through 'short-flat' and Ada through package
specifications, but I think that C++ is more
effectively concise than those languages.

I'll readily admit it's not much of an argument,
but at least it's better than yammering away
about "mine's longer than yours".
-- 
    c'iao,
    milo
================================================================
    John DiCamillo                        Pinin' for the fjords?
    milod@netcom.com                  What kind of talk is that?