One guidelines for C/C++ programmer

leppie

No, not here.

xacc.ide - now with TabsToSpaces support
IronScheme - 1.0 alpha 4a out now (29 May 2008)

BadKarma

That's correct, in fact here we encourage people to use the most ugly, unwell formed and disaster bringing code that they may come up to. ;P

Learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself.

leppie

BadKarma wrote:

That's correct, in fact here we encourage people to use the most ugly, unwell formed and disaster bringing code that they may come up to. Poke tongue

Or otherwise known as: Job Security ;P

xacc.ide - now with TabsToSpaces support
IronScheme - 1.0 alpha 4a out now (29 May 2008)

BadKarma

We should write our own coding standard. For beginner - Writing Code Horrors for dummies - Learn to Code in Horror Style in 21 days For Professionals - Advanced Horror Techniques : When template gone wrong - Gibberish : Take your obfuscation skill to a higher level

Learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself.

CPallini

Real C programmers (i.e. real men) don't use such girly tricks. They bravely make mistakes whenever is needed. ;P

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]

PIEBALDconsult

Oh, a coding standards horror. That only works when comparing an Lvalue and an Rvalue, and if a programmer can remember to do that, then he can remember to use the correct operator in the first place. Newbies will continue to screw it up, and experienced programmers will continue to get it right the first time. One company I worked for did have that in the coding standard, but even the guy who defined the standards admitted that it was pretty useless. If it causes you trouble you could switch to D, which will throw an error if it's not done right (if I recall correctly).

Joe Woodbury

Yes, because actually looking at your warnings is apparently too difficult.

Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke

BadKarma

Ahh, those with negative men points could always use

#define equals ==

which brings a nice touch to the code

int a = 3;
if( a equals 3)
{
 ...
}

But why stop here, just add the following

#define if if(
#define then ){
#define endif }

And youre code will look like this

if a equals 3 then
 ...
endif

It somehows reminds me of another language, I just can't get my fingers on the name ...

Learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself.

Nagy Vilmos

You haven't dealt with object equality. I know as a random key monkey, it's very dificult for me to remember that objA == objB is not the same as objA.equals(objB) Can you provide the best answer. I have to get the bugs out of the LCG framework before Thursday!

Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.

Johann Gerell

Guideline 1: Always compile cleanly on warning level 4.

-- Time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time - Bertrand Russel

asadullah ansari

I am not talking about a single or some person who can take care his code itself nicely. But when you will come to some big organization then Why they follows some process becausethey want minimize defects, minimize manpower,etc. So this small care can save some time .

Truth Can'nt be changed

CPallini

asadullah ansari wrote:

minimize manpower

Hence not a real-men company! BTW What is the point on minimizing manpower in software industry? Our work is creative after all, don't you agree? The Software Laborer :-D

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]

Nemanja Trifunovic

LOL. I remember someone suggesting defines like this:

#define please
#define thanks

And the code would be much more pleasant to read:

please do {
...
} while (i < imax);
thanks

Programming Blog utf8-cpp

Nemanja Trifunovic

Johann Gerell wrote:

Guideline 1: Always compile cleanly on warning level 4.

Gudeline 2: Turn on the option: "Treat warnings as errors".

Programming Blog utf8-cpp

Robert Royall

Doesn't LOLCode do something similar to this?

HAI
CAN HAS STDIO?
PLZ OPEN FILE "LOLCATS.TXT"?
AWSUM THX
VISIBLE FILE
O NOES
INVISIBLE "ERROR!"
KTHXBYE

Imagine that you are hired to build a bridge over a river which gets slightly wider every day; sometimes it shrinks but nobody can predict when. Your client provides no concrete or steel, only timber and cut stone (but they won't tell you what kind). The coefficient of gravity changes randomly from hour to hour, as does the viscosity of air. Your only tools are a hacksaw, a chainsaw, a rubber mallet, and a length of rope. Welcome to my world. -Me explaining my job to an engineer

ClementsDan

It's easier for me to remember the == than it is to remember to write the condition backwards.

Pete OHanlon

When posting to the forums, it's perfectly acceptable to post C/C++ questions in the C# forum because they've all got C somewhere in there name. Of course, this also means you can ask COBOL questions in there as well but that's the price you pay. Sod it - you can always throw Java questions in there because they've got curly brackets as well.

Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

My blog | My articles

ed welch

Even better, you could use #pragma to convert that particular warning into an error (I think it's possible anyways)

ed welch

Actually, writing if (x = 0) ... does not generate any warning at all (at least in VS 2005). Looks like this is a flaw in the compilor.

Johann Gerell

ed welch wrote:

Actually, writing if (x = 0) ... does not generate any warning at all (at least in VS 2005).

Of course it does. But you have to enable warning level 4 (as I pointed out in the "guideline") in the project property pages under C/C++ > General. Then you get this:

warning C4706: assignment within conditional expression

If you also set that warnings should be treated as errors, you get this:

error C2220: warning treated as error - no 'object' file generated
warning C4706: assignment within conditional expression

and that way you just cannot miss the assignment.

-- Time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time - Bertrand Russel