[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [groff] hyphenation issues

From: Ralph Corderoy
Subject: Re: [groff] hyphenation issues
Date: Sun, 06 May 2018 00:19:44 +0100

Hi Ingo,

> Even though you are right
> i strongly object to your argument.

I don't know what you think my argument is.

> [objective simplicity] undeniably favours "char const",

That was my point.  Though the widespread conventional method has that
in its favour, it doesn't mean the more logical consistent one is wrong
or misleading.  It mainly means the alternative hasn't been considered
for its merits, just dismissed because it `looks odd'.  A knee-jerker.

> Enjoy changing it all over place.

Sigh.  I made very clear: "I accept it isn't groff's style".
I'm not trying to change groff, or anybody's style.
I am trying to explain how C works because at least two experienced C
programmers on this list thought they weren't equivalent and that
Branden and I were therefore mistaken and creating errors in using it.

> In practice, coding styles using "char const" are rare to the point
> that i wasn't even aware until now that they exist at all.

Same here if I go back a couple of years.

> It is *not* a coincidence that the colleague you got the idea from
> "had no external influences".

That's the one that *persuaded* me of its merits.  Before that, I'd just
seen it and thought `Why write the equivalent thing in that odd way?'.
I've seen its use growing.  I suspect more projects will switch.
Branden was already using that style and that wasn't my influence.
Perhaps you're in a bit of a silo?  :-)

> This is not one of them, so adopting it is clearly a terrible idea.

I think you're wrong.  I'm adopting it.  I suspect over the medium term
its use will grow.  Other aspects of C style have also changed over the

> By the way, using "char const" doesn't make understanding
>   char *const *evil[2][3];
> any easier for people who do not know the rules...

Again, I wasn't saying it does.  Many people claim to `know Python' but
get caught by
    l = [42, 314]; m = l
not behaving as they expect.  You're just saying that not knowing a
programming language makes understanding it difficult.  Yeah.

Cheers, Ralph.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]