From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id WAA26350; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 22:28:09 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA26338 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 22:28:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from epexch01.qlogic.org ([63.170.40.3]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h38KS6X08682 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 22:28:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from epmailtmp.qlogic.org ([10.20.33.254]) by epexch01.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:28:18 -0500 Received: from [10.20.33.146] ([10.20.33.146]) by epmailtmp.qlogic.org with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:28:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:31:41 -0500 (CDT) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: Reply-To: Brian Hurt To: Jeff Henrikson cc: , Nickolay Semyonov-Kolchin Subject: Re: [Caml-list] single-line comment request In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Apr 2003 20:28:18.0658 (UTC) FILETIME=[640FC420:01C2FE0D] X-Spam: no; 0.00; qlogic:01 caml-list:01 henrikson:01 chunks:01 printfs:01 uncomment:01 gui:01 analogy:01 substituting:98 unix:02 silly:02 wrote:03 argument:03 arguments:03 arrow:95 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Jeff Henrikson wrote: > Though I favor the addition of the single line comments, most of the > comments thus far seem to be very subjective. I find the "80+ percent > of comments in the existing sources are single line comment" fairly > weighty. I also find the following unmentioned idea significant: > single line comments save large number of keystrokes when substituting > different chunks of code during testing. Also adding printfs. And any > comment-compile-uncomment-compile situation. It's a fairly specific > task, but also a pronounced difference when it happens. Actually, I was about to use this as an argument for why multi-line comments are better. I do this a lot- comment out huge swaths of code, and then uncomment it one function at a time. I do this by moving the (* around. Very fast. Very simple. Simply dd on the line with the (*, page or arrow down to the next break point, and do a p. > > I find a lot of the "no-single-comment" arguments to be sounding > remarkably reductionist in the way the "we don't need GUI" arguments > that certain die hard UNIX users purvey. Oh don't be silly. Of course we need a GUI- so we can multiple xterms on the same screen! :-) A more legitimate analogy would be not needing both a mouse and a trackball. You know- some people prefer mice, and others track balls, and sometimes it's more easy to use one than the other, so we really need both. Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners