Stylistic questions on UNIX C coding.
in [Unix Programming]
|
Prev: integer
Next: shared memory question
From: Casper H.S. Dik on 3 Mar 2010 08:57 pete <pfiland(a)mindspring.com> writes: >io_x wrote: >> char* replace2(char *s, char *p, char *q) >> {if(s==0||p==0||q==0) return 0; >> return replace2_search(0, s, p, strlen(p), q, strlen(q)); >> } >> >> that can be seen in one aye shot >Real programmers typically write programs that can't >all fit on a screen display. >With that in mind, they write in such a way so that >whatever can be displayed on a screen, is easiest to read. >You personally io_x, >will never write a program that can't all fit on one screen. His style is best known for the "Obfuscated C Code Contest" :-) Casper -- Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems. Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may be fiction rather than truth.
From: Richard Heathfield on 3 Mar 2010 09:34 Malcolm McLean wrote: <snip> > Someone somewhere will one day produce a client that lets you edit a > text file, stored on a mainframe, on a PC or workstation GUI. However > I haven't yet seen such a system. They're called 3270 emulators, and they're common as muck. Rumba is one example. <snip> -- Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk> Email: -http://www. +rjh@ "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line vacant - apply within
From: James Harris on 3 Mar 2010 09:52 On 3 Mar, 09:53, Richard Heathfield <r...(a)see.sig.invalid> wrote: > James Harris wrote: > > <snip> > > > I use vi a lot but IMHO editors with multiple input modes should be > > consigned to museums. > > vi has only *one* input mode. It also has *one* command mode. That's not > too many to manage. > > > Perhaps a better editor interface would work something like the early > > versions of Wordstar. (Anyone remember Wordstar?) > > Yes, I remember WordStar. If you think modes are bad, try embedded dot > commands! > > I agree that vi(m) is hard to learn. But it's easy to use, and I think > that is the most important criterion. *I* didn't say that it's hard to learn! I don't think it is. However I would say it's harder than necessary - which IMV is important. vi also has the command mode (or whatever its correct name is) after typing a colon and vim, at least, has macro entry mode then there's ex mode and search modes etc but they are not too bad. The problem I have with the two modes you mention is they look the same. The interface isn't manifest, if you like. Also, sometimes there is a genuine need to continually change mode such as entering characters with short - e.g. one or two - cursor movements between them (though the dot command can help if what's being entered is the same in each case). In contrast, I was thinking that an editor could/should have only one mode: text entry. There would still be Control-[a-z] and Control-[A-Z] for other commands without changing mode. For example, even on a keyboard with no cursor keys the cursor movements could be generated with single Control-<key> combination and longer commands could be entered by Control-<key><key> where the editor brings up a menu between the two keys. IIRC Wordstar only brought up the menu if typing was slowish so those who remembered the second key didn't need to see the menu and those who couldn't remember the second key got the menu as a prompt. Come back Wordstar, all is forgiven. Well, almost all.... James
From: Ben Bacarisse on 3 Mar 2010 09:57 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5(a)btinternet.com> writes: > On Mar 3, 3:01 pm, Lorenzo Villari <vll...(a)tiscali.it> wrote: >> >> I have to ask: what's the point nowadays of using a text mode only >> editor, apart from hardware restrictions and years of use? I guess >> that's "Masochistic answers to Stylistic questions on UNIX C coding"... >> > A lot of big computers still don't have windowing systems. Their > cycles are too expensive to be used on updating GUIs. > Someone somewhere will one day produce a client that lets you edit a > text file, stored on a mainframe, on a PC or workstation GUI. However > I haven't yet seen such a system. Uploading files by ftp manually is > too much of a nuisance. Have misunderstood? What you describe was commonplace when I last used "big iron" more than a decade ago. The big servers all ran NFS and you edited your files however you liked on your own workstation. You don't even need NFS, but it was the standard at the time. -- Ben.
From: Tim Streater on 3 Mar 2010 10:07
On 03/03/2010 14:34, Richard Heathfield wrote: > Malcolm McLean wrote: > <snip> > >> Someone somewhere will one day produce a client that lets you edit a >> text file, stored on a mainframe, on a PC or workstation GUI. However >> I haven't yet seen such a system. > > They're called 3270 emulators, and they're common as muck. Rumba is one > example. True, but it's still a text editor, basically. In the 80s I used one on Ambassador terminals via a Series/1 doing the emulation. I also used one a bit later (like 1990 or so) on a Mac but I can't remember whether the Mac went in via ethernet or just as a dumb terminal to the Series/1. I was not at all unhappy when I stopped using it. -- Tim "That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament" Bill of Rights 1689 |