Re: Baby X is bor nagain

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cl c  
Sujet : Re: Baby X is bor nagain
De : bc (at) *nospam* freeuk.com (bart)
Groupes : comp.lang.c
Date : 30. Jun 2024, 11:48:40
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v5rd69$g046$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 30/06/2024 10:05, David Brown wrote:
On 29/06/2024 13:11, bart wrote:

 
If there was some elaborate checker for Python code, or you had an extensive test suite that executed all lines of the program to check you hadn't mispelled anything, I expect you wouldn't to run those after every minor edit.
>
 No, not after every edit.  But then, I don't compile my C code after every edit.  It depends on the size and type of the edit.  Some checks - such as for misspelling - /are/ done continuously during editing, at least to some extent.  A decent IDE or editor will help there.
An IDE or editor which presumably uses some fast aspects of fast compilation to give you real-time feedback.
I don't use such smart tools and so rely on such feedback from the compiler.
Many edits to my source code (I realised this last night) consist of commenting or uncommenting one line of code, eg. that may call or not call some routine, or changing some internal flag to enable something or other, eg. to show extra diagnostics. Or inserting or removing an early return. Or adding or removing or commenting out some diagnostic print statements.
This is not working on the logic of some complex algorithm. It's changing something on a whim (maybe calling that fixup routine or not) and needing instant feedback. Here I don't need any deep analysis!
If compilation took a minute, then I might have to use command-line options instead of editing an internal flag or using commenting. I might need to use (or develop) a debugger to avoid recompiling. I'd have to revert (in my language) to independent compilation so I'd only need to compile a small part after any change.
I'd have to use some smart editor to tell me things quicker than a compiler would (if such an editor understood my language).
This does not sound appealing. More like going back decades.
Perhaps you can understand better why more-or-less instant compilation can be a useful thing, it eliminates the need for those cumbersome external solutions, and it keeps my own tools simple.
It opens up possibilities.

That is what gcc is like to me. There is no fluency. YMMV.
 It is possible to have your cake and eat it.  You think this is all a binary choice - it is not.  You can have smooth and fluent development /and/ powerful checking /and/ efficient generated code /and/ full-featured tools.
And you could have C development that works just like Python (well, minus its bundled libraries).

Date Sujet#  Auteur
28 Jun 24 * Re: Baby X is bor nagain54bart
28 Jun 24 +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain20Kaz Kylheku
29 Jun 24 i`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain19bart
29 Jun 24 i +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain10Tim Rentsch
29 Jun 24 i i`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain9bart
29 Jun 24 i i +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain5David Brown
29 Jun 24 i i i`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain4Michael S
29 Jun 24 i i i +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Keith Thompson
30 Jun 24 i i i +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Tim Rentsch
30 Jun 24 i i i `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1David Brown
30 Jun 24 i i +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain2Kaz Kylheku
3 Jul 24 i i i`- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1James Kuyper
30 Jun 24 i i `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Tim Rentsch
29 Jun 24 i +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain7Richard Harnden
29 Jun 24 i i`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain6bart
30 Jun 24 i i `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain5Michael S
30 Jun 24 i i  `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain4David Brown
30 Jun 24 i i   `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain3Michael S
30 Jun 24 i i    +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1David Brown
9 Jul 24 i i    `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Tim Rentsch
30 Jun 24 i `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Keith Thompson
29 Jun 24 +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain6David Brown
29 Jun 24 i`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain5bart
30 Jun 24 i `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain4David Brown
30 Jun 24 i  `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain3bart
30 Jun 24 i   `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain2David Brown
1 Jul 24 i    `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1bart
1 Jul 24 `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain27Ben Bacarisse
1 Jul 24  `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain26bart
1 Jul 24   +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Keith Thompson
2 Jul 24   `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain24Ben Bacarisse
2 Jul 24    `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain23bart
3 Jul 24     `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain22Ben Bacarisse
3 Jul 24      `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain21bart
3 Jul 24       +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain2Kaz Kylheku
3 Jul 24       i`- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Kaz Kylheku
3 Jul 24       +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Ben Bacarisse
3 Jul 24       `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain17David Brown
3 Jul 24        +* Re: Baby X is bor nagain14bart
3 Jul 24        i+* Re: Baby X is bor nagain12DFS
3 Jul 24        ii+* Re: Baby X is bor nagain3bart
3 Jul 24        iii`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain2Michael S
4 Jul 24        iii `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Malcolm McLean
3 Jul 24        ii+- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Ben Bacarisse
4 Jul 24        ii`* Re: Baby X is bor nagain7David Brown
2 Jan 25        ii `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain6DFS
2 Jan 25        ii  +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Phillip
2 Jan 25        ii  +- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Waldek Hebisch
3 Jan 25        ii  `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain3David Brown
3 Jan 25        ii   `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain2DFS
3 Jan 25        ii    `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1David Brown
4 Jul 24        i`- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1David Brown
3 Jul 24        `* Re: Baby X is bor nagain2Malcolm McLean
3 Jul 24         `- Re: Baby X is bor nagain1Keith Thompson

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal