Express What, not How.

[Vijay L]

gt5163b at prism.gatech.edu (Brian McNamara!) wrote in message news:<bmicpp$ifk$1 at news-int2.gatech.edu>...
> 
> I am in total agreement with Marcin.  What you (Raffael) say here
> sounds simply like dogma, rather than practical advice for constructing
> software.
> 
> As a short practical example of what I'm saying, consider code like
 
[snip]

> If I understand you correctly, 

It appears you don't.

[snip] 

> 
> In my opinion, the code here is worse than the original.

I agree.

[big snip]

You're taking things to a huge extreme to prove your point.  Obviously
Raffael, being a programmer himself isn't suggesting that each and
every calculation/operation be put in a named function.  The best
benchmark, is, I guess, the programmer himself.  When programming, if
you find some portion of code that /you/ feel won't be understand when
you're rereading it or, you took a chunk out of a function to debug it
and at that point had to give it a name as another function etc etc;
/then/ keep that portion aside as a named function.  It reduces the
burden on the person reading the original function that has been
shortened and, _gives him the choice_ to read this other function that
has been abstracted in that code.
 
Cheers,
Vijay

All future commitments are optimistic.