🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bw2I3B.L1n@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
   Here are some examples from one of the less nasty programs, srandom.c

   static  long            *state                  = &randtbl[ 1 ];
   static  int             rand_type               = TYPE_3;
   static  int             rand_deg                = DEG_3;
   static  int             rand_sep                = SEP_3;
   static  long            *end_ptr                = &randtbl[ DEG_3 + 1 ];
   initstate( seed, arg_state, n )              
   if(  ++rptr  >=  end_ptr  )  rptr = state;

   Now possibly these long names may be of some use to someone who does not
   know what is going on and has not read the documentation

1. "long" is a relative term, I'd consider the above names to be quite
   "short" :-).  For example, depending on the size of routine and the
   frequency of use I might change "end_ptr" to "te", "end",
   "table_end", "end_of_random_table" (I'd avoid "random_table_end" as
   it has unfortunate connotations)

2. Where is the documentation?  Without it I think I know understand
   the meaning of meaning of most of the above variables, but I'm
   guessing at "sep" means "separator" and that "deg" means "degree".
   If I'm right you might claim it is obvious, but I think the very
   fact that I'm _guessing_ proves otherwise.

If there is a set of abbreviations being used in the program, they
should be _documented_ and I mean _all_ of them including "common"
ones such as "ptr" for "pointer" and "tbl" for "table".  The fact that
the names are "internal" is no excuse for not documenting them.


   Now present technology is quite adequate to have a multi-font system
   without going into contortions.  A computer which did not catch on because
   of other problems provided for 16 128-character fonts, all user-modifiable,
   and this was more than ten years ago.  Possibly the CS language people can
   have some influence on the display software and hardware people to get this
   simple thing done; not only would I like it, but I assure you that the 
   secretaries who type our papers would greatly prefer it to what we have.

I must be missing the point here as I though any old Mac/PC could
display all the mathematical symbols you want providing your WP
software is capable which I'm told many are (I use LaTeX myself so I'm
not well versed in the latest WYSIAWYG systems).

bevan