Re: Linux kernel, possible useless continue

Ulrich Eckhardt <doomster@xxxxxxxx> writes:
Rainer Weikusat wrote:
Independently of your's and Mr Eckhardt's (unsubstantiated) beliefs
about compilers, source code should not contain noise statements,
because they will confuse an eventual reader.

Rainer Weikusat, since your discussion style is insulting and since you are
spreading lies like the above about me,

Since the statement above is factually correct, which can be easily
verified by reading the remaining thread, your claim is necessarily
factually wrong.

[...]

Always a nice quote in this respect:

A program is a sort of publication. It's meant to be read by
the programmer, another programmer (perhaps yourself a few
days, weeks or years later), and lastly a machine. The
machine doesn't care how pretty the program is - if the
program compiles, the machine's happy - but people do, and
they should.
<URL:http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/pikestyle.html>

Another thing that doesn't even address anything in the posting you are
answering to. While nothing in an of itself in this quote is IMHO
wrong, nobody (well, at least not I) ever asked the question whether the
discussed change should be made or not for reasons of clarity, this was a
mere discussion about whether a statement was necessary.

As the subject of this posting quite clearly show, the question was
wether it was 'useless', which is different from 'necessary'.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Linux kernel, possible useless continue
    ... about compilers, source code should not contain noise statements, ... Rainer Weikusat, since your discussion style is insulting and since you are ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.system)
  • Re: make: *** No rule to make target `inc/myProgram.inc
    ... Ron Shepard wrote: ... The other gotcha to watch for might be to put the include directory before the filename, rather than after it as I did in my earlier posting. ... but I'm pretty sure I've used other compilers where the order made a difference. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Borland or Microsoft ????
    ... >I believe that Ben gave very good advice in his posting. ... >that is vendor independent. ... >Borland or Microsoft produce excellent compilers. ... >The Borland one has been available for free for some time. ...
    (alt.comp.lang.learn.c-cpp)
  • Re: Returning to shell
    ... posting by John Harper for more details and some common quirks. ... compilers also support other compiler-dependent methods, ... but support of that is not as widespread. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: make: *** No rule to make target `inc/myProgram.inc
    ... Yes, that looks better, I didn't catch that in my posting. ... other compilers where the order made a difference. ... $.02 -Ron Shepard ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)