XPost: alt.folklore.computers   
   From: tnp@invalid.invalid   
      
   On 01/01/2026 14:28, Peter Flass wrote:   
   > On 1/1/26 05:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:   
   >> On 01/01/2026 03:07, c186282 wrote:   
   >>> On 12/31/25 17:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:   
   >>>> On 31/12/2025 19:21, c186282 wrote:   
   >>>>> I've writ stuff with five or six levels of nesting   
   >>>>>    but don't like it, usually if/then/else stuff. Oft   
   >>>>>    re-did it later to be more easy to follow. IMHO   
   >>>>>    readability/comprehensibility is as important as   
   >>>>>    functionally correct code.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> 100% agree.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Often write little functions that are only called once. Merely to   
   >>>> lexically separate atomic functional blocks.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No idea whether the compiler/linker inlines them or not.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> There is nothing worse than making top level decisions followed by   
   >>>> some nitty detail to detect some low level error.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> e.g. assume a call to allocate memory always works or the call will   
   >>>> do the appropriate jump to a global error handler to abort things   
   >>>> cleanly.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The point of structure was supposed to be to elucidate program flow,   
   >>>> not obscure it with elegant formally correct cruft.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>    Agree.   
   >>>   
   >>>    As I've said before, I'm still quite fond of Pascal and   
   >>>    write apps of various size in it (oft first proto-ed   
   >>>    in Python). The structure is 'elegant', but you CAN   
   >>>    carry it TOO far, to where it gets in the way instead   
   >>>    of helping things.   
   >>>   
   >> My one and only  experience of trying to make Pascal do what was   
   >> trivial in 'C' led me to resolve never ever to touch it again.   
   >>   
   >> If you are trying to write - as it turned out I was - a disk driver in   
   >> pascal, where a given sector may be a byte stream, a series of 16 bit   
   >> integers,  or a structure defined by thee first few bytes in the   
   >> sector, you end up with a massive union that is so cumbersome it is   
   >> almost impossible to read - let alone use.   
   >   
   > Doesn't Pascal have variant records?   
   >   
   IIRC it (Turbo Pascal. The amateurs language) had unions of some sort,   
   but I would have needed about 100 to cover all cases and it was even   
   then messy.   
      
   The existing code was shit anyway so I rewrote the lot   
      
   --   
   The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before   
   its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.   
      
   Anon.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)