[Oberon] NW programming style

[Srinivas Nayak]

One thing I noticed, we put a couple of Oberon statements in a single line...
Does this have any special significance?
I mean, is it that, the statements that are put in a single line
are somehow very closely related (logically) than other statements in other lines?


With thanks and best regards,

Yours sincerely,
Srinivas Nayak

Home: http://www.mathmeth.com/sn/
Blog: http://srinivas-nayak.blogspot.in/

On 07/11/2016 11:43 PM, Bob Walkden wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Oberon [mailto:oberon-bounces at lists.inf.ethz.ch] On Behalf Of
>> Richard Hable
>>
>> Am 2016-07-11 um 17:13 schrieb Skulski, Wojciech:
>>
>>> I was always amused by NW advocating high level programming, using
>>> named constants rather than hard coding the numbers, etc. And then in
>>> his published book Project Oberon the reader can enjoy seeing "1",
>>> "2", and "3" meaning mouse clicks left, middle, and right. Which is
>>> the exact opposite of the principles NW was teaching.
>>
>> I don't think the master of simplicity ever advocated using named
> constants
>> in cases like this. It is not difficult to count to three when looking at
> the
>> mouse keys, and it wouldn't be possible to change the number assignment
>> anyhow without breaking compatibility to central Oberon System modules.
>>
>>> The grad students then cleaned the code in their Unix/Linux/Windows
>>> ports of Project Oberon. They used ML, MM, MR meaning mouse left,
>>
>> Students often exaggerate when applying the principles of their master. :)
>
> ML, MM and MR aren't much better than 1, 2 and 3 anyway, since they refer to
> the physical position of the buttons rather than to the semantics. The
> semantics of the mouse should also include the chords.
>
> B
> --
> Oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
> https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/oberon
>