| Re: The Elements of IDL style [message #37480] |
Tue, 23 December 2003 10:44 |
btt
Messages: 345
Registered: December 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Fanning wrote:
> Michael Wallace writes:
>
>
>> I hope I'm not opening a can of worms with this question. Maybe I am.
>> If I am, let the fun ensue! ;-)
>>
>
>
> Of course there is an IDL Style Guide. It is called
> the "Coyote Way" and I have made it a 16-year quest
> to get it adopted. So far, only Ben Tupper has converted,
> and then only intermittently. :-(
>
>
Hi David,
Like a carrot hanging before the old mule, this gives me something to
aspire to everyday.
Peace on Earth,
Ben
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Elements of IDL style [message #37491 is a reply to message #37480] |
Mon, 22 December 2003 11:52  |
JD Smith
Messages: 850
Registered: December 1999
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:39:43 -0700, David Fanning wrote:
> Michael Wallace writes:
>
>> I hope I'm not opening a can of worms with this question. Maybe I am.
>> If I am, let the fun ensue! ;-)
>>
>> I am curious if there are any community guidelines for coding
>> conventions and style for IDL. I tried googling, but the results I
>> turned up were either "do whatever you want" or just some little blurb
>> about one little itty-bitty facet of the language. I did find a link
>> that looked promising, http://www.rsinc.com/helpfile.asp?wh=14, but
>> alas, I got a lovely empty white web page in return.
>>
>> I'm not just interested in the style of coding things like when to use
>> UPPERCASE or lowercase or MixedCase, but also in what is an appropriate
>> way to name functions and procedures, files and such.
>>
>> The coding standards meetings I've been in over the years have been
>> some of the most heated and hated meetings of all and at the end of the
>> day, when the dust has settled, no real progress was made except that
>> everyone now thinks that everyone else is a stark raving mad idiot. So
>> with that in mind, I don't want to start anything like that. Either
>> standards exist or they don't. If they exist, I'd appreciate someone
>> providing a link to the standards. If not, just tell me so, and I'll
>> make up my own.
>
> Of course there is an IDL Style Guide. It is called the "Coyote Way" and
> I have made it a 16-year quest to get it adopted. So far, only Ben
> Tupper has converted, and then only intermittently. :-(
>
> *Which* style you use is much less important than the fact that you
> *have* style. All decent IDL programmers have style, and it usually
> involves consistent indenting and use of white space, as well as a style
> of capitalization. I've never seen two good programmers use the same
> style, but when you look at a piece of IDL code you know immediately
> whether you are looking at the work of a stylish programmer or not. And
> believe me, if you are, that program is going to be a LOT easier to work
> with and to understand.
>
> A style helps you see how a program works. A good style along with
> decent variable naming conventions allows you to "read" code the way you
> might read a book. (And, of course, a *great* style involves a copious
> amount of program documentation, too.)
To avoid inciting riot, first I'll say it really is a matter of taste. I
for one am a big fan of "compact" expression, which means I use much
shorter variable names than, e.g., David, but probably with a higher
comment/code ratio (especially when doing something hairy with HISTOGRAM).
Consistent indentation is a must: IDLWAVE can help, if you're an Emacs
person. Otherwise, pick your style and stick to it. I use IDLWAVE
settings:
idlwave-main-block-indent 2
idlwave-end-offset -3
idlwave-continuation-indent 3
which lines things up like:
pro indent_test
for i=0,2 do begin
print,i
endfor
end
Continuing line indentation is slightly more subjective, but IDLWAVE has
several settings to help you there too (including a new, optional
Kernighan-inspired method due in the next release), and can
auto-capitalize, space-pad, and enforce many different configurable style
conventions. Without it, my code would probably be a mess.
I reserve upper case for all keywords, mixed case for class and method
names, and use lower case for almost everything else (variables,
function/procedure names, loop statements, etc.). This just saves trips
to the shift key for me.
When creating procedures and files, keep in mind the limitations IDL has
with routine names: no two routines or classes can have the same name
(well, they can, but bad things will result). With most IDL installations
having literally ~10,000 or more routines installed, it's important to
develop ways to conserve the namespace. One way is to use objects, which
segregate all methods under a single class heirarchy. You can also use a
method-like convention for normal routines, ala:
pro prefix_dosomething
end
function prefix_returnsomething
end
This is vital if you plan to distribute your code (or can envision it ever
getting distributed). Many people use their initials in the prefix, RSI
uses "IDL", but anything unique to your program will do. A procedure
named "calculate" is an example of a poorly named routine.
Other than that, I'll just echo David's comment to pick something and
stick to it.
JD
|
|
|
|
| Re: The Elements of IDL style [message #37496 is a reply to message #37491] |
Sat, 20 December 2003 08:39 |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael Wallace writes:
> I hope I'm not opening a can of worms with this question. Maybe I am.
> If I am, let the fun ensue! ;-)
>
> I am curious if there are any community guidelines for coding
> conventions and style for IDL. I tried googling, but the results I
> turned up were either "do whatever you want" or just some little blurb
> about one little itty-bitty facet of the language. I did find a link
> that looked promising, http://www.rsinc.com/helpfile.asp?wh=14, but
> alas, I got a lovely empty white web page in return.
>
> I'm not just interested in the style of coding things like when to use
> UPPERCASE or lowercase or MixedCase, but also in what is an appropriate
> way to name functions and procedures, files and such.
>
> The coding standards meetings I've been in over the years have been some
> of the most heated and hated meetings of all and at the end of the day,
> when the dust has settled, no real progress was made except that
> everyone now thinks that everyone else is a stark raving mad idiot. So
> with that in mind, I don't want to start anything like that. Either
> standards exist or they don't. If they exist, I'd appreciate someone
> providing a link to the standards. If not, just tell me so, and I'll
> make up my own.
Of course there is an IDL Style Guide. It is called
the "Coyote Way" and I have made it a 16-year quest
to get it adopted. So far, only Ben Tupper has converted,
and then only intermittently. :-(
*Which* style you use is much less important than
the fact that you *have* style. All decent IDL programmers
have style, and it usually involves consistent indenting
and use of white space, as well as a style of capitalization.
I've never seen two good programmers use the same style, but
when you look at a piece of IDL code you know immediately
whether you are looking at the work of a stylish programmer or not.
And believe me, if you are, that program is going to be a LOT
easier to work with and to understand.
A style helps you see how a program works. A good style along
with decent variable naming conventions allows you to "read"
code the way you might read a book. (And, of course, a *great*
style involves a copious amount of program documentation, too.)
The only *absolute* rule I have, and this drives me absolutely
insane, is that people learn to name their programs and structure
their program modules in a file in such a way that they don't have
to compile the damn thing every time they want to use it. But I
have written about this, too (apparently to little avail given
the typical code I see when I am out and about):
http:/www.dfanning.com/tips/namefiles.html
This probably has less to do with the Coyote Way then it does
with the IDL Way. But programs should be written in a way that
they automatically compile themselves. Period. :-)
(Whew! Am I ready for Christmas yet? I've been working on
that Scrooge thing.)
Cheers,
David
P.S. Let's just say if you find any code around here written by
someone named, say Liam, or Craig, or JD, or Rick that it is likely
to have the appropriate style for you to emulate. :-)
--
David W. Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Phone: 970-221-0438, E-mail: david@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
