Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:52:45 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <vspdad$9cru$1@dont-email.me>
References: <87y0wjaysg.fsf@gmail.com> <vsj1m8$1f8h2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsj2l9$1j0as$1@dont-email.me> <vsjef3$1u4nk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsjg6t$20pdb$1@dont-email.me> <vsjjd1$23ukt$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsjkvb$25mtg$1@dont-email.me> <vpdHP.1828825$TBhc.94105@fx16.iad>
 <vslhrm$7uv3$1@dont-email.me> <vsll4b$8mfb$3@dont-email.me>
 <vslq6b$ginf$1@dont-email.me> <vsm45d$ncfh$4@dont-email.me>
 <vso9fa$34vau$1@dont-email.me> <vsogcq$3b14s$2@dont-email.me>
 <vsop83$3k0rp$1@dont-email.me> <vsostb$3nn12$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsp0bj$3qlrs$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:52:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e2c747021cf4b98cdbf0e00a9e01b7cd";
	logging-data="308094"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/oYXjjy++fdYvu+CuIwC81H/JKUqpbODc="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XEhw+0T3sFTNjvX0erXKzM+/t2Q=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vsp0bj$3qlrs$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4142

On 4/4/2025 9:11 AM, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 17:12:42 +0200
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> gabbled:
>> On 04/04/2025 16:10, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
>>> On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 13:39:06 +0200
>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wibbled:
>>>> On 04/04/2025 11:40, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 15:58:05 +0200
>>>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wibbled:
>>>>>> Human readers prefer clear code to comments.  Comments get out of 
>>>>>> sync -
>>>>>> code does not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thats not a reason for not using comments.
>>>>
>>>> It is a reason for never using a comment when you can express the same
>>>> thing in code.
>>>>
>>>> If that's your problem, write better code - not more comments.
>>>
>>> Ah, the typical arrogant programmer who thinks their code is so well 
>>> written
>>> that anyone can understand it and comments arn't required. Glad I 
>>> don't have
>>> to work on anything you've written.
>>
>> Arrogance would be judging my code without having seen it.  Writing 
>> code that is clear and does not require comments to say what it does 
>> is not arrogance - it is good coding.
> 
> Any sufficiently complicated code requires comments. Thats why comments 
> exist.
> The fact that you think you're code is so amazing that it doesn't says a 
> lot
> about you. And no, it isn't that you're an incredible dev, more the exact
> opposite.
> 
>>> Rubbish. A lot of the time what is being done is just as obtuse as why.
>>
>> That can /occasionally/ be the case.  But if it happens a lot of the 
>> time, you are writing poor code.  It's time to refactor or rename.
> 
> I'm guessing you've never written any sufficiently complicated code where
> there may be numerous steps to create a single action.
> 
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>>     colour_to_hex(10);
>>>     return 0;
>>> }
>>
>> UB.  It's /your/ fault.
> 
> Yup, you are one of *those* devs.
> 
> Rest of self justifying blah snipped.
> 
>>> Just assuming they'll always pass parameters within limits is not just
>>> cretinous, its dangerous.
>>
>> Nope.  It is how software development works.  If you don't understand 
> 
> It really isn't. Get out of your bunker some time.

Actually, some of my comments are usually at a higher level... Think of 
something for a recursive function:
________________
// Bailout Condition(s)...
<code_here>

// Compute...
<code_here>

// Render...
<code_here>

// Recurse...
<code_here>
________________


High level... So to speak.