On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 21:37:58 GMT, Roger Halstead
wrote:

Shouldda had my old instructor in college. You turned in nothing with
out a flow chart (Nazzi Schinerdman?). Then pseudo code, then the
program with plenty of internal documentation.

NS diagrams ("structured flowcharts") never added anything to
structured code. For that matter, neither did conventional flow
charts. They may have had a use once before we settled on the control
structures in use today. IMHO, there's still a pedagogical use for
conventional flow charts to teach the student how the structures work
(i.e. that the condition in a while loop is only evaluated at the
beginning of each iteration).

IMHO, there's no substitute for good naming conventions and comments
that say *why* you're doing something. I can see what you're doing.
Best ever example is the Edison Design Group source code (compiler
front ends). They've turned it into an art form.

In general, reading good code really does help you a better programmer,
almost, but not completely, exactly unlike how talking about flying
makes you a better pilot.


Can we talk about aviation now?


Morris