Docstrings considered too complicated

[Albert van der Horst]

In article <hm9cbc$9p4$1 at speranza.aioe.org>, Mel  <mwilson at the-wire.com> wrote:
>Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote:
>> Andreas Waldenburger wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:09:36 -0600 Tim Daneliuk <tundra at tundraware.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Reminiscent of:
>>>> mov  AX,BX               ; Move the contents of BX into AX
>
>>> Well, there might be some confusion there as to what gets moved where,
>>> wouldn't you say? I guess this goes away after a couple of months,
>>> though.
>
>> I agree to that statement, I was surprised that mov AX,BX assumes that
>> BX is the source, and AX the destination. I never programmed in
>> assembler though.
>
>You could think of it as a not bad use of the design principle "Clear The
>Simple Stuff Out Of The Way First".  Destinations are commonly a lot simpler
>than sources -- just as in Python assignment statements.  So you can tell
>more or less at a glance what's going to be changed, then get into the deep
>analysis to find what it's going to be changed to.

The real background is that a very long time ago at Intel
the first guy that wrote an assembler, got it "wrong", i.e.
violated the conventions established already at the time.

No nothing clever, nothing conscious, just reinventing the wheel
badly.

Next time you tell me that the MSDOS "file" system was well thought
out :-)

>       Mel.

Groetjes Albert

--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert at spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst