Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:00:16 06/07/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 2005 at 17:54:41, William Hoggarth wrote: >On June 07, 2005 at 13:52:10, Tord Romstad wrote: >>Glaurung is also quite small (and the next version will almost certainly >>be smaller), and the code is designed to be as clear and straightforward >>as possible. I seem to have failed spectacularly; it appears that most >>people find it very difficult to read. I would appreciate if somebody >>could try to explain me why, and help me to make future versions more >>instructive. > >I have looked at your code for Glaurung recently. I would make three suggestions >to improve readability for beginners: > >1) More frequent and detailed comments > >Compare with TSCP which has plenty of detailed comments about what's going on. >Explain you data structures as they are the key to understanding the program. More comments are always nice. But they also increase code complexity. There is nothing so bad as a wrong comment too (so if you change the code, the comment must stay in step or you introduce a very serious defect). >2) Eliminate tricks > >Try to replace things like <<3 and & 15 etc. with a macro that has a more >meaningful name, so people can understand what's going on. Those aren't tricks. They are language elements. Someone who reads a chess program in the C or C++ language should know what they mean. >3) Long names > >Try to use meaningful names for macros, variables and functions. Your source >code isn't too bad in this respect but there are still some names which are too >short. I like his naming conventions, but to each his tastes. >These are the points that immediately come to mind. > >HTH.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.