******** damn schools!!!

[Spotted Cheetah]

[quot]Good to see you're back spamming TBBQ.[/quot]

What does this actually mean? I now really not know... (I am posting here by
downloading the stuff fastly in Notepad, then writing offline, then posting
them. This way i have to be online just less than 5 minutes daily, it is
expensive in Hungary, but this method can sometimes mess up posts).


Back to that coding thing: i think a well commented code never needs further
explanation what i could experience all over the Internet. On the other hand
now i have my own coding scheme what not fits to the others, but has certain
advantages what makes my development much easier. To see an example look in
my QBasic FM Midiplayer's source: there the function / variable naming
conventions came from my idea primarily to distinguish well the groups, and
to avoid accidental redeclarations (That was the first code what i wrote
fully fitting to that). I am using that convention in my larger C(++)
project(s) too. I have others too, but they are not so important.

As i said i think i would never run in problems understanding other codes
if they are explained well. The convention itself does not help anything.
For example the Hungarian convention for variable naming is only good when
more people work on exactly the same function, otherwise in the prototypes
any name can be given fitting to any convention. I think my convention has
more use in large C projects: fitting to that will hopefully effectively
prevent accidental redeclarations. At overall i think the best is to create
a coding scheme fitting to everyone working on a source, and then doing it
that way. An other possibility what would not be really hard, but boring is
to write some program what can reorder source codes to fit to a convention,
then there would be no problem if for example two programmers have to work
together who got used to different coding schemes. Forcing a coding
convention on somebody who got used to one different one already has no
point: the only result of it can be that the programmer fails to do his/her
job.

So i think teaching a convention by force can only make a programmer
narrow - minded so that (s)he will finally really not be able to understand
codes written using other schemes no matter how good they are explained. If
(s)he can build up his/her scheme on her/his own, then (s)he will better
understand other schemes too, and will be able to program for example using
three or more ones when it is needed. Since the information technology
develops fastly, programming does too, so that it can never be said that
this is the "perfect ultimate coding convention". So understanding more, and
having the alibity of dynamically changing, or developing better ways will
never hurt.

What goes in the school is just money, and lazyness. It is far more easier
to stuff the heads with programming in a half year than actually teaching
it, but of course this will only go if somebody actually learned programming
already to the time they are doing this. Others, possibly ones who would
become a great programmer with careful leading, will turn away. It is not
teaching.

I am just speaking for freedom instead of that cruel, money - oriented
lifestyle going on nowadays. We have the power to make human life better,
but it would be against those 1% who own 99% of the materials of the world.
And that 1% is not happy like the other 99%, but they fear from losing
their damn money... It really have to go this way??