Re: [dwm] Documentation!

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Enno Gottox Boland <gottox_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> That's what I still think too. Fortunally DEFGEOM is gone in dwm-tip.
>
> Nevertheless there is a trend in dwm to "overoptimise" the code. I
> think dwm-4.7 was the simplest. That's why my branch is still based on
> 4.7.
>
> 2008/5/16, Steffen Liebergeld <stepardo_AT_gmail.com>:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> after some time in proprietary environments I tried to get back to dwm.
>> Unfortuately I was somewhat disappointed.
>>
>> Although I really appreciate your effort to simplify and reduce the code, it
>> is now my impression that you drove it too far. The code is small as hell,
>> and it might even be somewhat clever, but it is anything than
>> self-documentary.
>>
>> Just have a look at that line:
>> DEFGEOM(single, 0, 0, sw, 0, bh, sw, sh-bh, wx, wy, mfact*sw, wh, mx+mw,
>> wy, ww-mw, wh, wx, wy, ww, wh)
>>
>> This is a true "wtf"! What the **** could that be? Could you at least
>> document what this creature is? Do I have to read all the code, and
>> understand it just to get the meaning of this single cryptic line.
>>
>>
>> I am looking forward to get an explanation about this. And maybe someone
>> could start documenting the code, to make it useful again.
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Greetings, Steffen
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> http://www.gnuffy.org - Real Community Distro
> http://www.gnuffy.org/index.php/GnuEm - Gnuffy on Ipaq (Codename Peggy)
>
>

I'm glad to see i'm not alone.
The over-emphasis on stripping the code down is getting ridiculous.
Even if fewer LOC is a goal, two and three character variable names
are over the top. It affects the binary in no way, and only serves to
obscure the code.

The LOC goal itself is really silly in my mind anyway. while it might
be an interesting relative metric to track, arbitrary limits (2000
SLOC) seem like a silly exercise at best; the goal should be to "do
one thing and do it well". Why should a window manager only be 2000
LOC, it may only require so many lines, but it may require more,
limiting functionality (or worse, code clarity) for LOC goals is a
terrible trade-off.

Regards,

-Andrew
Received on Sat May 17 2008 - 06:19:49 UTC