U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Re: bug in Web/TServ [message #2240 is a reply to message #2238]

Wed, 05 April 2006 07:57

rylek
Messages: 79
Registered: November 2005

Member

I guess you're right. The bug you have found by itself suggests such code is error-prone. I'm not a big fan of three-line boolean expressions but from time to time they're really hard to resist Wink

. As concerns the 'exec' variable, you are right again. But please also note there are literally tens of thousands global functions in both Windows and Linux development environment, in API, in the various plugins and in our own code as well, so the requirement, when taken absolutely, is much easier said than done. I'm currently quite content if I manage to avoid accidentally using macros for variable names, which doesn't work at all (not mentioning half of our methods which are invisibly appended the 'A' prefix in Windows because of hosts of the Unicode-compatibility macros), or having two nested for-loops in the same control variable,

for(int i;;)
    for(int i;;)
        ...

and even this can be sometimes tricky to avoid in a 300-line routine. Returning to the programming tutorials, one should not write 300-line routines, but again I've already met a few occasions (not many, to be honest) where breaking a long function into a multitude of smaller ones seemed to me both to decrease code legibility and to make the code less efficient. Sometimes the practical work calls for a compromise and here's the one I'm offering: next time I'm doing something with TServ, if I stumble over the above discussed code, I'll rewrite the while loop and rename the 'exec' variable.

Regards

Tomas

P.S. A little final point: the aforementioned while loop is indeed tricky, but I see it as a rather elegant way to skip quote-escaped quotes in strings. Honestly I use it rather often, thankfully most of the times without the omitted parentheses. Please just try yourself to rewrite it without the complex condition and I bet you'll find the resulting code rather ugly too Very Happy

[Updated on: Wed, 05 April 2006 08:02]

Report message to a moderator