>That main function is good, standard style. Unnecessary goto, variables defined far away from where they are used, monster function, variables are not commented what they do, not all functions are commented what they do..
To me, it looks like that there is no intention to optimize readability and testability. Instead it looks like there is put effort to minimize amount of functions or something. >It has one small getopt(3) loop, decrements argc/argv, has one small >codeblock to handle arguments for each variant of the utility, and >one concise fts(3) main loop to handle files, and finally a one-liner >for error handling. It would be better if they all are put to separate functions. That is the whole point in functions, to put task to single program fragment. >So what's the point? You can't *calculate* whether something is >readable for a *human*, and that's what matters. There are measured human factors, example size of working memory. If there is measured magic constants, it is possible to calculate what is somewhat better or worse. Something to aim for: -Less linearly independent paths in module -High cohesion -Low coupling These are basics. It also matters a lot for testability. Less independent paths means less test cases.
