variable names - who cares!?
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
there could also be a % or $
I remember that. $ for strings, and % for integer if I recall correctly. Funny thing, I still have the old Commodore sitting in the eave/storage thingee, 10 feet away from this desk. Maybe I'll dig it out one of these days :)
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
Paul Conrad wrote:
% for integer
Right, but we all said, "Why would we ever want to use an integer? Reals will do whatever we need."
-
sounds like the kind of thing you'd get from a machine-ported app. i worked at a place that had some C code which did quadratic optimization. but nobody could make any sense of the C, because it had been machine-translated from FORTRAN - all the variables were "a", "b", "c", etc., and the code was full of GOTOs and statics. we eventually bought a C# implementation.
sadyly, it was hand-written - I know the professor that wrote it. All of his programs are written that way. :((
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
-
When dealing with punch cards, short variable names are a blessing.
short variable names are always a blessing. :)
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
I don't recall what the limit was in the macro assembler, but in Commodore Basic it was only the first two characters counting.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
Well, here we have one big difference between interpreters and assemblers / compilers. An interpreter, like the good old BASIC, must hold the source in RAM, as well as every variable in use. On my old machine, it had only 4k for the interpreter AND the program AND the variables, it was the same: Better live with short variables and without comments than getting an out of memory error before the program is complete. In assembly programs or with a compiler this is no problem. Comments and variable names only make the source file longer, but both don't make it into the executable.
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
there could also be a % or $
I remember that. $ for strings, and % for integer if I recall correctly. Funny thing, I still have the old Commodore sitting in the eave/storage thingee, 10 feet away from this desk. Maybe I'll dig it out one of these days :)
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
Do it. It's fun to see the old machines going again. But also a bit scary, how primitive things were back then and how much we have been spoiled by the comfort of modern machines. Let's see, which one am I going to use tonight? The old Elf II? Atari 400? Or shall I take the Atari 800 XL? Or perhaps the 1040 ST? ....
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
-
a friend of mine - many years ago - was asked to port a physics simulation program from one platform to another. The software performed beautifully, was efficient, and had won awards for educational excellence etc. the source code was several thousand lines of assembly, which was large but not too large for that platform and era. The program had two comments in it, one word each. They were not helpful. The variable naming convention was even more interesting. It seems the original author [a physicist/mathematician, in all fairness] treated variable names like a Pez dispenser. The first variable in the program was named "A", the second was named "B", and so on. When he got to Z he started over with A1, then B1, etc. The program had a lot of variables, I think the last variable was named BB21. Porting the application was not too difficult, as the two platforms had very similar instruction sets. Debugging it, on the other hand, was an exercise in insanity!
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
A place where I used to work had a lot of code with variable names like a, aa, b, bb, etc. Their reason? The time they saved by not typing out a longer variable name would add up to a significant time savings over the course of a year. They also saw nothing wrong with method names like "DoIt". You think that these things would make the code to understand? Their answer to that objection was "A good programmer can figure out what the code does!". I don't work there anymore, for obvious reasons ;).
-
Well, here we have one big difference between interpreters and assemblers / compilers. An interpreter, like the good old BASIC, must hold the source in RAM, as well as every variable in use. On my old machine, it had only 4k for the interpreter AND the program AND the variables, it was the same: Better live with short variables and without comments than getting an out of memory error before the program is complete. In assembly programs or with a compiler this is no problem. Comments and variable names only make the source file longer, but both don't make it into the executable.
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
CDP1802 wrote:
we have one big difference between interpreters and assemblers / compilers.
Oh yes, that was my first lesson in the difference between compilers and interpreters. Writing a program in the old Commodore Basic, then write the equivalent - sometimes by hand - in assembly, and what a bit of difference that was :) I did get my first Intel based machine as a high school graduation present, in 1991, an Intel 80386-DX25mhz box. I had qbasic and Microsoft Quick Basic 4.5 both installed on the machine. Bit of a performance difference between those two, back then.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
Do it. It's fun to see the old machines going again. But also a bit scary, how primitive things were back then and how much we have been spoiled by the comfort of modern machines. Let's see, which one am I going to use tonight? The old Elf II? Atari 400? Or shall I take the Atari 800 XL? Or perhaps the 1040 ST? ....
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
CDP1802 wrote:
Do it. It's fun to see the old machines going again.
I'm going to. Had a friend back in college write his own lynx-like browser for his C128. It was pretty cool.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
a friend of mine - many years ago - was asked to port a physics simulation program from one platform to another. The software performed beautifully, was efficient, and had won awards for educational excellence etc. the source code was several thousand lines of assembly, which was large but not too large for that platform and era. The program had two comments in it, one word each. They were not helpful. The variable naming convention was even more interesting. It seems the original author [a physicist/mathematician, in all fairness] treated variable names like a Pez dispenser. The first variable in the program was named "A", the second was named "B", and so on. When he got to Z he started over with A1, then B1, etc. The program had a lot of variables, I think the last variable was named BB21. Porting the application was not too difficult, as the two platforms had very similar instruction sets. Debugging it, on the other hand, was an exercise in insanity!
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
Steven A. Lowe wrote:
BB21
Is he a fan(atic) and lunatic user of Microsoft Excel (spreadsheet program) which has this AA, BB type arrangements for its grid?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts... --William Shakespeare -
I spent too much time dealing with numerical modelling suites written in FORTRAN written exactly the same way. Thousands and thousands of lines, and all the variables "x", "xx", "xxx" etc. Comments? We're physicists, not literary majors. We don't need no stinkin' comments. The code is obvious anyway... :doh: :sigh:
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Actually, once the application is run through an obfuscator tool, the output code would be like this. Isn't it?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts... --William Shakespeare -
Actually, once the application is run through an obfuscator tool, the output code would be like this. Isn't it?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts... --William ShakespeareVasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote:
the output code would be like this. Isn't it?
Depends. I did give the Skater obfuscator a try, and it has the ability to create non-printable member/method names. It does crash a certain useful tool when obfuscated in such a manner.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
a friend of mine - many years ago - was asked to port a physics simulation program from one platform to another. The software performed beautifully, was efficient, and had won awards for educational excellence etc. the source code was several thousand lines of assembly, which was large but not too large for that platform and era. The program had two comments in it, one word each. They were not helpful. The variable naming convention was even more interesting. It seems the original author [a physicist/mathematician, in all fairness] treated variable names like a Pez dispenser. The first variable in the program was named "A", the second was named "B", and so on. When he got to Z he started over with A1, then B1, etc. The program had a lot of variables, I think the last variable was named BB21. Porting the application was not too difficult, as the two platforms had very similar instruction sets. Debugging it, on the other hand, was an exercise in insanity!
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
Hey... I resemble that remark. Andrew
-
Steven A. Lowe wrote:
BB21
Is he a fan(atic) and lunatic user of Microsoft Excel (spreadsheet program) which has this AA, BB type arrangements for its grid?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts... --William Shakespeare:laugh: No, actually he's a Mac fan, and the program in question is older than spreadsheets...
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
-
CDP1802 wrote:
we have one big difference between interpreters and assemblers / compilers.
Oh yes, that was my first lesson in the difference between compilers and interpreters. Writing a program in the old Commodore Basic, then write the equivalent - sometimes by hand - in assembly, and what a bit of difference that was :) I did get my first Intel based machine as a high school graduation present, in 1991, an Intel 80386-DX25mhz box. I had qbasic and Microsoft Quick Basic 4.5 both installed on the machine. Bit of a performance difference between those two, back then.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
Well, I guess I tossed myself into the cold water. It was 1978, I was 12 years old and, as always, had a little difference of opinion with my parents. So I spent the day out of harm's way at a local mall. There was a little Radio Shack where they had just unpacked a TRS-80 Model I. They made the mistake to leave that that thing unattended and so they had me as a guest all day, trying to figure out what you can do with a computer. And when I finally got home, my poor parents were surprised to learn that the previous issues were totally irrelevant and that getting a computer was now the highest priority :) Their answer was a simple 'no', but I kept harassing them until they got me a kit for 100$. It was an Elf II with tremendous 256 bytes RAM, a hex keypad and a video resolution of 64 x 32 pixels (monochrome). So it was no neat but slow BASIC for me, it was entering machine code with the hexpad. And my parents soon got longer lists of desperately required hardware.
A while ago he asked me what he should have printed on my business cards. I said 'Wizard'. I read books which nobody else understand. Then I do something which nobody understands. After that the computer does something which nobody understands. When asked, I say things about the results which nobody understand. But everybody expects miracles from me on a regular basis. Looks to me like the classical definition of a wizard.
-
A place where I used to work had a lot of code with variable names like a, aa, b, bb, etc. Their reason? The time they saved by not typing out a longer variable name would add up to a significant time savings over the course of a year. They also saw nothing wrong with method names like "DoIt". You think that these things would make the code to understand? Their answer to that objection was "A good programmer can figure out what the code does!". I don't work there anymore, for obvious reasons ;).
a while back I visited a web site that gave me a javascript error on load. curious, i looked at the page source. The function with the bug was named "JoshIsCool" :laugh:
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
-
a while back I visited a web site that gave me a javascript error on load. curious, i looked at the page source. The function with the bug was named "JoshIsCool" :laugh:
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
-
a friend of mine - many years ago - was asked to port a physics simulation program from one platform to another. The software performed beautifully, was efficient, and had won awards for educational excellence etc. the source code was several thousand lines of assembly, which was large but not too large for that platform and era. The program had two comments in it, one word each. They were not helpful. The variable naming convention was even more interesting. It seems the original author [a physicist/mathematician, in all fairness] treated variable names like a Pez dispenser. The first variable in the program was named "A", the second was named "B", and so on. When he got to Z he started over with A1, then B1, etc. The program had a lot of variables, I think the last variable was named BB21. Porting the application was not too difficult, as the two platforms had very similar instruction sets. Debugging it, on the other hand, was an exercise in insanity!
Best regards, Steven A. Lowe CEO, Innovator LLC www.nov8r.com
-
Actually, once the application is run through an obfuscator tool, the output code would be like this. Isn't it?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts... --William ShakespeareAmazing! His friend has a mind like an obfuscator.