Fewer lines, all else being equal, will on average lead to fewer bugs.
Programming is largely about reading, and the larger the code the
harder it is to spot a logic error. I'm not advocating Perl-like
obfuscation ($_ anyone?), removing identifiers that have meaning, but
instead advocating removal of boilerplate, and identifiers that have
no meaning.
In a related topic, sometimes I find myself shortening code so that I
can see the bugs more clearly. I find it very effective.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Miroslav Pokorny
<miroslav.poko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> No, I never stated that, because I don't believe it.
>> Using higher-level concepts with fewer *tokens* will reduce the number of
>> bugs. It just so happens that few tokens usually result in shorter code.
>
> Thats not what you said, you made a generalised sweeping statement that can
> only be wrong because nothing in software is ever that simple.
>
>>
>> I don't even consider comments when thinking about how long code is,
>> because comments aren't code.
>> Using shorter identifiers *may* reduce the risk of bugs if they're
>> otherwise so long that they obscure the essential complexity of an
>> algorithm. Seriously, would you write something like this?
>> for(int
>> indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration=0; indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration<=authorsFromNameQuery.length;
>> ++indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration) {
>> Author currentAuthorBeingIteratedOver
>> = authorsFromNameQuery[indexOfAuthorInCurrentIteration]
>> // do something with the author
>> }
>> Do you NOT believe that shorter names would make the example clearer?
>>
>> On 25 October 2010 02:38, Miroslav Pokorny <miroslav.poko...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> @Kevin
>>>
>>> I guess refactoring code so all identifiers are really short single
>>> characters ( a human powered obfuscator) means i just made my code have less
>>> bugs..right ?
>>>
>>> If my class names are shorter and thus my source files have less
>>> characters does that mean my code has less bugs ?
>>>
>>> if my code has no comments does that mean it has less bugs ?
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Wright
>>
>> mail / gtalk / msn : kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com
>> pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright
>> twitter: @thecoda
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "The Java Posse" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
>
>
> --
> mP
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
