this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2020
1 points (100.0% liked)
The C Programming Language
32 readers
6 users here now
Everything related to the C programming language.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hmmm, it says:
But dwm is not easy to understand and hack on, it's terrible code with one and two-letter identifiers and sparse documentation that leaves you having to reverse-engineer it to understand it. Browsing this code it doesn't look as bad on identifiers, but it's still largely un-commented and requires reverse engineering to get any understanding of it.
One source file is definitely not a plus point, neither is limiting the lines of code, that just encourages people to use obtuse terse constructs over clarity. This one code file is a mass of unrelated functions and data structures just thrown together in one place for no good reason - presumably for people who find it challenging to work on more than one file at once?
These are things that chased me off dwm. It seemed like the bad coders' idea of good code, and the whole "if you want an optional feature just apply a patch (and fix conflicts, etc..)" was utter bullshit too.
Sorry to be so negative, but dwm really rubs me the wrong way and I resent the time I wasted trying to live with it. This looks to have the same wrong-headed development aims. To each their own, if anyone likes it, good for them!