On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 01:27:49PM +0000, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> perhaps literate programming will fix that if it ever takes off.
I use CWEB (D. Knuth and Levy's) intensively and it is indeed
invaluable.
It doesn't magically improve code (my first attempts have just shown
how poor my programming was: it's a magnifying glass, and one just saw
with it bug's blinking eyes with bright smiles).
It is absolutely easy to use. But it is not another mean for
programming, but another way.
But once you think about what you want to do (and recognize the layout
of CWEB as the layout of good old text books---the paragraphs), and
start putting down "axioms" and implementing the correct pieces, the
payoff is great in consistency and conciseness, hence in maintenance.
(At the beginning, I was writting "books", and descriptions were
long and poor, even sometimes pure non-sense. Quality has increased
while length has decreased.)
BTW, I also use CVS and record a short description of the modifications
or extensions made. But to be honest, except for tagging what fault has
been suppressed and from which version, the remaining has not been of any
use (it is supposed to be correctly explained in the doc written with
CWEB...).
I also use CVS as a backup mean, i.e. a lot of short time changing
revisions have no engineering sense since there are only backup of
a work in progress. So my use of CVS is an impure one and can not claim
to resort exclusively to engineering.
I do plan to set up a plan9 file server. But it's TODO.
--
Thierry Laronde (Alceste) <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
http://www.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
