Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Boyd Roberts]

please put the Reply-To: back, please?

From: Boyd Roberts <boyd@planete.net>
To: <saroj@bear.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: [9fans] off topic: troff book


> From: <saroj@bear.com>
> > 
> > Sorry, how many programs written by you can be read from cover to
> > cover and fully understood?
> 
> would you like statistics or would you just prefer for me to
> say _all_ of them?  then again, it depends on the _reader_ too.
> 
> read pop.c in:
> 
>     http://www.planete.net/~boyd/code/mace.bundle
> 
> and get back to me.

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[saroj]

In article <008501c07fe6$f760dd60$0ab9c6d4@cybercable.fr>,
  boyd@planete.net (Boyd Roberts) wrote:
> please put the Reply-To: back, please?
>
> From: Boyd Roberts <boyd@planete.net>
> To: <saroj@bear.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 7:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [9fans] off topic: troff book
>
> > From: <saroj@bear.com>
> > >
> > > Sorry, how many programs written by you can be read from cover to
> > > cover and fully understood?
> >
> > would you like statistics or would you just prefer for me to
> > say _all_ of them?  then again, it depends on the _reader_ too.
> >
> > read pop.c in:
> >
> >     http://www.planete.net/~boyd/code/mace.bundle
> >
> > and get back to me.
>


I am sure you can write good programs. I do not have time to
check mace.bundle though. My point was before you dismiss
Knuth's work, please read MMIX, Stanford Graphbase, and many
others using LP. From what I know, you have been in programming
for a long time, but if you have not already checked out his
work and books, it may be a new beginning for you.

Thank you,
Saroj Mahapatra


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Boyd Roberts]

From: <saroj@bear.com>
> I am sure you can write good programs. I do not have time to
> check mace.bundle though. My point was before you dismiss
> Knuth's work, please read MMIX, Stanford Graphbase, and many
> others using LP.

think i'll stick with my methods.  they've been known to work :-)

brevity is good.

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Boyd Roberts]

> Well, if you're writing *maintainable* code,
> you're including appropriate comments.

like i said, it's a judgement call.

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Boyd Roberts wrote:

> are we writing code or comments?

Well, if you're writing *maintainable* code,
you're including appropriate comments.

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Boyd Roberts]

i'm with russ.

are we writing code or comments?

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Russ Cox]

This is getting more off topic by the day.  It is
not worth arguing categorically for or against
literate programming.  

At Bell Labs the programs I write are in the
traditional style Boyd is espousing.  
At Harvard I've used literate programming tools
to write a compiler, numerous small programs in
various languages, and an intro to programming
languages text demonstrating mark-and-sweep and
copying garbage collection in a from-scratch scheme
interpreter.

It is possible to write very clear code that really
doesn't need comments nor "literate" interpretation.
It is possible to use LP to great advantage for making
an unfamiliar programming style immediately accessible
to a new audience (like students in an intro course,
or a professor grading your assignments).
It is also possible to write completely inscrutable
code that literate programming tools alone have
no chance of saving.

The right approach for the job depends critically
on the intended audience and on the existence
of common coding style between you and that audience.
Most programmers cannot just dive into unfamiliar
code and poke around to figure out what's going on.
LP can make the dive a bit less scary.  Like any tool,
though, if used badly it can do more harm than good.

I'd be happy to discuss specifics off-9fans.

Russ

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Boyd Roberts]

> | please put the Reply-To: back, please?
> 
> Ok, done.

praise the lord and pass the ammo :-)

Re: Tr: [9fans] off topic: troff book

[Scott Schwartz]

| please put the Reply-To: back, please?

Ok, done.