From: Chad Perrin <code@...>
Date: 2010-10-15T00:37:28+09:00
Subject: Re: Why does a lot of code not include parenthesis?

--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 03:21:22PM +0900, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 6:04 AM, egervari <ken.egervari@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Of course, once one gets used to it, I guess it'll become readable.
>=20
> Absolutely. A seasoned Perl vet will consider Perl code very readable,
> too, after all. ;)

Only well-written, readable Perl is particularly readable, even to a
"seasoned Perl vet" -- just as only well-written, readable Ruby is
particularly readable, even to a "seasoned Ruby vet".

Taking an example like what was brought up earlier, there are a bunch of
different ways to represent a complex expression:

1. 10.div(10.div(5))

2. 10.div( 10.div(5) )

3. 10.div 10.div 5

4. 10.div(10.div 5)

5. 10.div( 10.div 5 )

6. 10.div 10.div(5)

There are other options as well, but I have to stop some time.  Anyway,
in my opinion, the *worst* of those for readability are 1 and 3.  2 and 6
are probably the next least-readable.  It takes a little judgment to
write readable code, regardless of the language, and in cases where
parentheses are optional, I find that obsessive adherence to "always use
parentheses" or "never use parentheses" rules are not conducive to
producing the most readable code.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAky3Io8ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKUFTgCg5lzds7sCzGXtCLoW5S3pYyW9
3J4An2lOUDm5miXtlnK2BLBFxSJLaFHd
=t+kX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj--