On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 09:30 +0000, Pete Biggs wrote: > > HTML code is bad to begin with due to its fundamental formatting, but > > leaving out linefeeds, tabs, and spaces just makes it worse. Would you > > like reading a book with no punctuation, no paragraphs, and lack of > > structure? Yet I see lots of that kind of documentation, and even more > > code like that. This is not furthering the profession, nor is it > > helpful. > > > > With that said, here is a snippet from the gconf stuff for evolution: > > > > Directly from the file: > > DON'T PLAY WITH THE GCONF FILES. They are NOT meant for human > consumption. They are machine readable XML files formatted in a way > that is most convenient for a machine to read. The only reason > the .gconf hierarchy exists is as a dump of the current config between > sessions & the only reason they are text based XML is that it is an > extensible standard that is easily parsable. It matters not one jot to > the machine if there are line breaks or tabs in the XML to make it look > pretty - all it does is to take up extra space. > > > How many of you can read and understand this bit of code? > > My gconfd can and that's all that matters. They are NOT text config > files like /etc/yum.conf. > > > > > I especially dislike the ##########.#####.#@localhost.localdomain > > filename. > > It's not a file name, it's a UID - the clue is in the bit before it > which says "uid=". It's a unique identifier for, in this case, a group > calendars. > > > This has no significance to the job being accomplished. As > > much as I rail against "self documenting code", this is just beyond > > useless. It smacks of trying to use obfuscation for security, which has > > been proven over and over to not aid security. Other than that it has > > no value, no significance and adds no real value to the process being > > described. > > Since these are uids are never externalised by the program, there is no > significance, or value, in giving it a human readable name. > > > > > > But putting an entire page of a book of code in one line is > > unforgivable. I write converters between systems, changing hardware, > > software platforms and instrument capabilities. I would be embarrassed > > to show something like this to one of my customers, moreover it would > > probably result in my never being hired again. > > The fact that you seem not to grasp the usage or significance of Gconf > and are willing to indulge in a rant without researching what you are > ranting about would make me very worried if I were one of your > customers. > > > > Cleaned up just a bit, the use of the code becomes clearer. But it > > also uses two forms of HTML controls, both the <header>...</header> and > > the <header />. Both are of course legal and useful in some contexts, > > but it is usually preferable to maintain consistency. > > IT'S NOT HTML. Not everything that has <..> in it is HTML. And both > those contructs you mention are used consistently AND properly in the > XML snippet you are quoting. > > > > > If you read all the way to here, thank you. If you disagree, that is > > OK, but remember that one day you will have to support code written in > > one block that is over 3000 characters long (I have already seen that on > > some web pages.) > > It's NOT code either - it's XML. It's a data description language. > > P. > XML means eXtended Meta Language. It is a programming language with structure and meaning, and it is extensible. You can call it a data description language, and that means it standardizes the representation of information. It is a coding language for the representation of data.
And it is still garbage when it is presented like garbage. Yes, I can figure it out, I can even hand edit it, but not with the pathetic tools offered, and moreover it is NOT a calendar. Regards, Les H _______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
