From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Code cleanup. Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:01:34 +0200 Message-ID: <85bqo0xlrl.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85y7r7l00o.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1161803004 16361 80.91.229.2 (25 Oct 2006 19:03:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 19:03:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 25 21:03:19 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gco1h-0002Mh-0j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:02:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gco1g-0001o9-H3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:02:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gco1V-0001nt-48 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:02:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gco1U-0001ng-44 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:02:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gco1T-0001nd-Us for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:02:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1Gco1T-0005I4-2j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:02:43 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Gco1L-0005ni-Kr; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:02:36 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 61B351C452EE; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:01:34 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Wed\, 25 Oct 2006 14\:03\:26 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:61168 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > The right time for code cleanup would be whenever we > are installing new features. > > However, in my opinion, your change does not either increase > or decrease readability. It's a tossup. Uh, setting tem to "", an artificial empty string, in order to have j incremented once again before breaking out of the finished loop is readable? Is this kind of "readable" synonymous to "comprehensible with serious effort", reminiscent of mathematicians' use of "trivial" as synonymous with "provable with serious effort"? If one hits a terminating condition of a loop, one should exit the loop instead of setting up artificial values to variables that have the only purpose of causing an exit at a convenient point later in time. In other words: while "readability" is certainly a matter of personal taste, you find me surprised at your taste. I don't claim that my proposal was perfect, but I would not have thought it a tossup. I'll keep my version in my private tree, and will likely sneak it in after the release. At least I hope that nobody will find my proposal actually strictly less readable than the original, and so we'll at least get one developer (myself) marginally more happy without offending others. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum