But there is so much more to all of this than something a banal as
attributing it to numbers of characters. For example levels of abstraction
within a method, naming, method size etc, etc, etc. I just can't understand
why people simply bound around these pointless conjectures and random
percentages figures.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Ricky Clarkson <ricky.clark...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 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<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@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<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@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<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@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<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@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.
