Author: William Hoggarth
Date: 15:17:41 06/07/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 2005 at 18:00:16, Dann Corbit wrote: >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). I don't see how comments increase code complexity at all. They make it easier to read. I'm not suggesting adding wrong comments either ;) TSCP did not become so popular because the comments get in the way. >>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. In one sense you are right, they are not tricks, and yes the reader should know about bitwise operations. But compare: Side^1 switch_sides(Side) The second is a lot more readable and both will compile to the same code (assuming you've set up the macro right). >I like his naming conventions, but to each his tastes. Indeed, I did say there were only a few places where it could be improved.
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.