Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
I used to have a C programmer working for me that reveled in condensing multiple lines of C code to a single statement, much more obtuse than that. He is no longer employed here. Nuff said Doug * Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Don't ask me how I know that. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
And as a side-note most compilers worth using will generate the same machine instructions when you optimize, so there's no benefit in the cute versions. The more long-winded readable version is much more valuable in the long run... IMO -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of George Gallen Sent: January-16-12 10:54 AM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
H This has whole topic has been mentioned on here before, and my stance is the same, if you can not read that code and work it out in 4 seconds, then maybe you should not be a programmer. Code is code, read it , understand it, get over it -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: 16 January 2012 18:50 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1416 / Virus Database: 2109/4146 - Release Date: 01/16/12 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
I agree with Tony. You can write dense code, but the goal should always be to write clear, documented, code so the next programmer doesn't have to figure out what you are trying to do. The more dense the code, the higher the cost to maintain the code. The beauty of PICK code is that you can write self-documenting code, or code that is dense and obtuse. I urge everyone to write clear code, including meaningful variables and comments! Tom RATEX Business Solutions -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 3:17 PM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? H This has whole topic has been mentioned on here before, and my stance is the same, if you can not read that code and work it out in 4 seconds, then maybe you should not be a programmer. Code is code, read it , understand it, get over it -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: 16 January 2012 18:50 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1416 / Virus Database: 2109/4146 - Release Date: 01/16/12 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
I agree, if it took you more than 4 seconds to work that piece of code out you shouldn't be a programmer. But if it requires working out and thus at least twice as long than reading a simple if-then-else statement it's definitely not a brilliant piece of code. On 16/01/2012 20:16, Symeon Breen wrote: H This has whole topic has been mentioned on here before, and my stance is the same, if you can not read that code and work it out in 4 seconds, then maybe you should not be a programmer. Code is code, read it , understand it, get over it ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
It's not about whether somebody can or can't read the code, it is about productivity and avoiding errors. Why should it take 4 seconds to figure out a line of code? 4 seconds times a thousand lines of code is over an hour of wasted time. Charles Shaffer Senior Analyst NTN-Bower Corporation ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] UniVerse on Windows
I have a customer who is setting up a brand new user in UV on Windows -- this is a running machine, has been for years -- but the first new employee is a long while. This new user, when they get the Telnet log on and put in their user name/password is NOT being asked for the path to account they want to go into. They are being 'dumped' into the UV account. And then they cannot 'log to' anywhere else. The customer swears this new user is built just like all others -- a Domain User with 'User Rights' on the UV Server. Rocket tech support has said the is fix is that users HAVE to have Admin rights in order to be prompted for the 'UniVerse account' Something seems wrong with that answer. I mean, I am guessing it will fix the issue, but I hate passing out Admin rights when the real answer is probably something else. So -- What else might be the cause here?? (I am WAY more UD than UV, so any idea will likely be something I have NOT tried yet!) Thanks - David W. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
Hi Tony, That is high praise indeed! I don't know Mark, but he sounds like someone I would enjoy working with very much. Hopefully he will get to read this. I would like to make his acquaintance. I have always worked hard to write clean, orderly code. That way the poor sap (sometimes me) who has to work on it months or years later will have a much easier time of it. I've caught some grief over the years for spending a few timeslices in making my code clear, readable and self-documenting, but I still do it. Regards, Charlie Noah On 01-16-2012 12:50 PM, Tony Gravagno wrote: From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
Hi George, Are there any implementations now that don't support X += 1? Not that I have a problem with X = X + 1 - works just fine and is very clear. I usually try to code to the common denominator, within reason, of course. Over my 34 years in the biz I've been through a lot of conversions of one MV to another. The most dreaded part was finding and fixing things that worked on the old system but not on the new. Universe is famous for being very forgiving and figuring out what you really meant. Jbase not so much. We spent a lot of time on issues like that. Regards, Charlie Noah On 01-16-2012 12:53 PM, George Gallen wrote: This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
I wasn't just referring to flavors/implementations of PICK, but I also do a lot of cross language pick, perl, javascript, php, vb, java, etc I hate having to remember whether I can use a ++ or ++= or =++ or whatever. It's funny, I'll use x=x+1 because it always works, and almost always, someone will say, you knowyou could use instead - sometimes its easier to keep it simple that works on all areas, than to have to remember each variation. It's bad enough the subtle differences between perl, php, javascript and java. George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charlie Noah [cwn...@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 7:17 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? Hi George, Are there any implementations now that don't support X += 1? Not that I have a problem with X = X + 1 - works just fine and is very clear. I usually try to code to the common denominator, within reason, of course. Over my 34 years in the biz I've been through a lot of conversions of one MV to another. The most dreaded part was finding and fixing things that worked on the old system but not on the new. Universe is famous for being very forgiving and figuring out what you really meant. Jbase not so much. We spent a lot of time on issues like that. Regards, Charlie Noah On 01-16-2012 12:53 PM, George Gallen wrote: This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] UniVerse on Windows unclassified
Hi David, Confirm that the UV.LOGINS entry for the user is correct. Whilst they are in the UV account, have them ED UV.LOGINS username. If they are a domain user their record should look like this: ED UV.LOGINS username 5 lines long. : P 0001: domain i.e BOBCOM 0002: 0003: uv account path i.e D:\WORK\WORKACCOUNT 0004: 0005: free text description of user i.e Mr B. Smith Bottom at line 5. : Q Cheers, Andrew -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Wolverton Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2012 11:35 a.m. To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: [U2] UniVerse on Windows I have a customer who is setting up a brand new user in UV on Windows -- this is a running machine, has been for years -- but the first new employee is a long while. This new user, when they get the Telnet log on and put in their user name/password is NOT being asked for the path to account they want to go into. They are being 'dumped' into the UV account. And then they cannot 'log to' anywhere else. The customer swears this new user is built just like all others -- a Domain User with 'User Rights' on the UV Server. Rocket tech support has said the is fix is that users HAVE to have Admin rights in order to be prompted for the 'UniVerse account' Something seems wrong with that answer. I mean, I am guessing it will fix the issue, but I hate passing out Admin rights when the real answer is probably something else. So -- What else might be the cause here?? (I am WAY more UD than UV, so any idea will likely be something I have NOT tried yet!) Thanks - David W. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] UniVerse on Windows unclassified
David, Have you client look at one of the users that is working. You will find that they are an admin on the UniVerse box. If they want the user to be prompted for the account. If they want the user to log into a specific account then they need to change the user policy on the telnet services to be ANY UV.ACCOUNT and then place the user in the UV.LOGIN and then they will go to that account. Note I have found problem with this working on some versions of UniVerse and Windows with a DNS other than the UniVerse Server. Kathleené M Hunter -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of MACK ANDREW, MR Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:30 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] UniVerse on Windows unclassified Hi David, Confirm that the UV.LOGINS entry for the user is correct. Whilst they are in the UV account, have them ED UV.LOGINS username. If they are a domain user their record should look like this: ED UV.LOGINS username 5 lines long. : P 0001: domain i.e BOBCOM 0002: 0003: uv account path i.e D:\WORK\WORKACCOUNT 0004: 0005: free text description of user i.e Mr B. Smith Bottom at line 5. : Q Cheers, Andrew -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Wolverton Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2012 11:35 a.m. To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: [U2] UniVerse on Windows I have a customer who is setting up a brand new user in UV on Windows -- this is a running machine, has been for years -- but the first new employee is a long while. This new user, when they get the Telnet log on and put in their user name/password is NOT being asked for the path to account they want to go into. They are being 'dumped' into the UV account. And then they cannot 'log to' anywhere else. The customer swears this new user is built just like all others -- a Domain User with 'User Rights' on the UV Server. Rocket tech support has said the is fix is that users HAVE to have Admin rights in order to be prompted for the 'UniVerse account' Something seems wrong with that answer. I mean, I am guessing it will fix the issue, but I hate passing out Admin rights when the real answer is probably something else. So -- What else might be the cause here?? (I am WAY more UD than UV, so any idea will likely be something I have NOT tried yet!) Thanks - David W. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
I understand - and I agree with you 100%. You have it even tougher working cross-language. I don't envy you. Back in the 80s a programmer told me I would starve if I didn't learn C. Then in the 90s another told me I'd starve if I didn't get into Java. I've been very fortunate that I'm still fighting the weight, though. ;^) Charlie On 01-16-2012 6:58 PM, George Gallen wrote: I wasn't just referring to flavors/implementations of PICK, but I also do a lot of cross language pick, perl, javascript, php, vb, java, etc I hate having to remember whether I can use a ++ or ++= or =++ or whatever. It's funny, I'll use x=x+1 because it always works, and almost always, someone will say, you knowyou could use instead - sometimes its easier to keep it simple that works on all areas, than to have to remember each variation. It's bad enough the subtle differences between perl, php, javascript and java. George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charlie Noah [cwn...@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 7:17 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? Hi George, Are there any implementations now that don't support X += 1? Not that I have a problem with X = X + 1 - works just fine and is very clear. I usually try to code to the common denominator, within reason, of course. Over my 34 years in the biz I've been through a lot of conversions of one MV to another. The most dreaded part was finding and fixing things that worked on the old system but not on the new. Universe is famous for being very forgiving and figuring out what you really meant. Jbase not so much. We spent a lot of time on issues like that. Regards, Charlie Noah On 01-16-2012 12:53 PM, George Gallen wrote: This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not?
I can vouch for Charlies code because I still work on some that he wrote over 13 years ago. Universe is much more forgiving on 'nix systems. On Windows, not so much. Of course that may be because 'nix systems are more forgiving than Windows. When I come across code such as the one that started this thread, I usually figure it was done by someone that knew they wouldn't have to work on the code again. It's good to learn new and better ways to program but wisdom should tell you whether or not it should be used. Most of us, on this list, have been programming for several decades and know what we had to go through to get to this point. If we want new programmers to jump on board we need to remember what it took and give them a break. It's nice to show off but does it do your company or clients any good if others have to take days, even minutes, to figure out what you did. Jerry On 1/16/2012 6:17 PM, Charlie Noah wrote: Hi George, Are there any implementations now that don't support X += 1? Not that I have a problem with X = X + 1 - works just fine and is very clear. I usually try to code to the common denominator, within reason, of course. Over my 34 years in the biz I've been through a lot of conversions of one MV to another. The most dreaded part was finding and fixing things that worked on the old system but not on the new. Universe is famous for being very forgiving and figuring out what you really meant. Jbase not so much. We spent a lot of time on issues like that. Regards, Charlie Noah On 01-16-2012 12:53 PM, George Gallen wrote: This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 George -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? From: Charles_Shaffer Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code like that can reduce portability. Different compilers may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported from one platform to another. Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any dumb compiler or programmer can read it. On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, not. One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is Brilliant. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
