Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm not sure I see the point...

You could make things much more readable by just using decent formatting and descriptive variable names. I know, it's decorated C code, and academic C code at that, but damn, some of that stuff is a mess to try to read.

Maybe I've been in C#/Java/Python/JS land for too long, but javadoc/xmldoc/docstring documentation is a lot more readable. If you really want to, you can dump in markup, pictures, non-ASCII characters, etc into the html-based documentation.

The more I look at it, this stuff must be a monstrosity to try to actually write. I can't see it being at all attractive, unless you were doing well-defined, algorithmic code. Or you could write it in normal C and package it as a library that people might actually use.

The author is Donald Knuth, in case you didn't catch that. Since most of these are dated from the 90's, you should probably be comparing verbosity to COBOL or PASCAL and keeping in mind this was from before the ubiquity of Linux or Python, and long before Java, Javascript, or C#.

Most of them are dated from the 2000s.

It's hard to miss that it's on Knuth's website. Just because it's published by one of the gods of computer science doesn't mean that it is code in a style that anyone should be encouraged to emulate.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact