- Win32: WaitOnAddress vs. WaitForSingleObject - 6 Updates
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Jan 13 08:30AM > using namespace std; You are making the already-hard-to-read code even harder to read by avoiding all the clarifying std:: prefixes. And for what? What exactly do you gain from it? Not clarity, that's for certain. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Jan 13 01:56PM +0100 > You are making the already-hard-to-read code even harder to read by avoiding > all the clarifying std:: prefixes. ... That doesn't make the code hard to read. |
| Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Jan 13 01:44PM >> You are making the already-hard-to-read code even harder to read by avoiding >> all the clarifying std:: prefixes. ... > That doesn't make the code hard to read. It does, because you are mixing names from Windows.h and from the standard library, and it's not as easy to see which names are from the latter by a quick visual scan. Likewise names from the standard library get confused with local variable names because they all look visually very similar and there's nothing distinguishing them. When names from the standard library are visually denoted with the "std::" prefix, they stand out from all the other names, making it easier to make the distinction, and to more quickly see which standard library utilities are being used and where. There is literally zero advantage in *not* using the prefix. There are arguably disadvantages. Even if you think that those disadvantages are minuscule, they are still disadvantages, and there's absolutely no reason to have them, no matter how small you think they may be. This especially so when you are posting code to a forum where you are asking other people to examine your code and understand what it's doing. You should make your code as easy for others to understand as possible. Clarity of your own code is your responsibility, not the responsibility of the people you are asking. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Jan 13 04:30PM +0100 > It does, because you are mixing names from Windows.h and from the standard > library, and it's not as easy to see which names are from the latter by a > quick visual scan. ... Your point is absolutely compulsive. Someone who programs C++ should know the standard library. Haven't read the rest of your nonsense. |
| Nikolaj Lazic <nlazicBEZ_OVOGA@mudrac.ffzg.hr>: Jan 13 09:29PM > Your point is absolutely compulsive. > Someone who programs C++ should know the standard library. > Haven't read the rest of your nonsense. Maybe you should at least try to... |
| Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee>: Jan 14 12:08AM +0200 13.01.2021 17:30 Bonita Montero kirjutas: >> quick visual scan. ... > Your point is absolutely compulsive. > Someone who programs C++ should know the standard library. And someone who includes Windows.h should know all the half zillion names it declares, right? You are forgetting a tiny point: computer code is not meant as an exam or test for readers' ability to remember and recognize tons of names from various large interfaces. The purpose of the source code is to present a working algorithm in a way that is as easy as possible for people to understand and modify. Otherwise, we could just compile our work into machine code and forget about source code repositories. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment