On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:49:37 +0200 Ulrich Lauther <ulrich.laut...@t-online.de> wrote:
> other modifications would really > improve readability and maintainability: > - capitalization of class names > - a naming convention for class member variables > - reducing the number of global variables You want to tread lightly where style is concerned. Whether or not something is more "readable" depends very much on what you're used to. There's no consensus in the C ++ community at large on the above recommendations. Many people are accustomed to capitalizing classes and decorating member names. I think the first is a requirement in Java, and the latter was popularized by Microsoft's ugly "m_varname" convention. In his books, Stroustrup uses capitalized class names and ordinary, undecorated variable names. Stroustrup has observed that if you ask a room of experts for suggestions on how to improve C++ and make it more accessible to the beginner, you'll be deafened by silence. If you want a lively discussion, he says, ask where the curly braces should go. > - for each class a block of comments explaining what the > class is all about For this particular suggestion to appear on the groff list is a little ironic, no? Since the epoch Unix source code has been documented with man pages adjacent to the source in the tree, with its rich formatting features. Surely in-line text-only documentation as comments would be a retrograde step, and a long one at that? Else we might as well close up shop and rename the project Doxygen! --jkl
