Tools for manipulating message catalogs
Joe English
jeenglis at alcor.usc.edu
Mon Apr 15 03:47:32 AEST 1991
eliot at dg-rtp.dg.com writes:
>In article <1991Apr11.084924.1951 at alphalpha.com>, nazgul at alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley) writes:
[...]
>|> Not only does my gencat create .h files, it also allows me to
>|> create a catalog that doesn't specify any numbers at all - it generates
>|> them automatically.
>So instead of having to type in numbers, you have to type in symbolic names.
>Why is this any easier? Symbolic names are an advantage when you want to be
>able to change the underlying value later on. I claim that with message
>numbers, you shouldn't change those values! These numbers should be CONSTANTS!
You never want to change the value of pi either [*], but
most programmers prefer to use a symbolic constant rather
than a numeric literal. I agree with the statement that
1 and 0 are the only two numeric literals that should appear
in a program; every other magic number should be given a
symbolic value. Especially in a situation like message catalogs,
where the number itself is an arbitrary constant with no
intrinsic meaning of its own.
--Joe English
jeenglis at alcor.usc.edu
[*] This isn't entirely true: if you port a program from
a machine with 64-bit doubles to one with 128-bit doubles,
then the representation of PI *will* change. Something
like SIGINT or SEEK_END would be a better example.
More information about the Comp.unix.programmer
mailing list