Well not really, for instance it could take you 20 lines to initialize a device on a port. In that case it would be a benefit to have a block comment above the section explaining what it`s for, also it would be helpful to comment each line to explain what each value or step is for. Putting in comments doesn`t mean you write bad code, it means you want to understand it when you come back to it in a year or 10.

I disagree with you 100%, you should have a comment almost every line or a block comment every section. I work on tons of embedded code where smart ass developers decide to not comment there code and use piss poor structure. Comments are used so everyone else can read and understand your code, if it takes me more then 1 minute to figure out what you did then you wrote bad code period.

Things that make code hard to work on or horrible to read and understand.

1. Over structured.
2. Over Abstracted.
3. Use of Object Oriented concepts.
4. Bad comments (99.999% of developers can't write comments to save there lives).
5. Complex loops to prevent using goto.
6. Using pointers over arrays because you can.
7. Using case statements in place of if's.
8. Single line if statements with out the brackets.

I could keep going but to sum it up quickly, all the standard "good coding" practices basically destroy code, so don't listen to your professor.

Distracted driving does not exist, it's an invention to protect the feelings of the weak.

3.9 out of 4 accidents involve piss poor drivers and nothing else. Blaming cell phones or for that matter anything else for car accidents is like blaming smokes for killing smokers. As a society we have formed a system that protects and promotes stupidity and makes it offensive or hurtful to tell someone what you really think.

If you take away all the label and the BS you are left with a simple truthful fact, bad driving is caused by bad drivers being idiots behind the wheel of a machine they shouldn't be. Lets stop calling it by different names and finally call it out for what it is, if your feelings get hurt in the process then maybe we'll start fixing the problem for once.

Basically take a computer science degree and you'll hear all the lies in world in a short time. A truly good programmer doesn't give deadlines, doesn't make claims and doesn't brag without showing what he has done. Oh and it should be noted that 99.9% of all programmers have no F'ing clue how to write a useful or valid comment.

I think you should have to take 1 course on ASM / C, 1 course on maybe C++ / Python and then 1 course on web programming. After all if students are forced to take multiple English classes all through high school then shouldn't they also be forced to take something useful? I can honestly say that my programming classes were a much bigger benefit to me then my Shakespeare.

I agree

I agree that the problem is that the father told the daughter, however making this about the daughter is wrong, the daughter could of written every national newspaper and appeared on the nightly news but unless she signed the same contract as her father, SHE and SHE alone can not be held accountable. The father is the one being held accountable in truth, the exact issue here is that he told her and that is it.

The only downfall in this entire situation is that the father admitted to telling the daughter, if he wouldn't have then this entire case would still be cut and dry. Unless the daughters signature appears on the same contract as the fathers then the daughter can not and would not be held to the same level of responsibility and liability.

Ya that still doesn't make sense, think about it, the contract was between the father and the employer, not anyone else. Granted the father told the daughter, but the daughter never had a legal contract with the employer, so by default the daughter should not be held to same standard, only the father could of voided the contract, which the idiot did, but the daughter never signed that contract, hence she should not be held to the same standard of liability.

But if she didn't agree under contract to the originators of the contract then it shouldn't matter. I'm pretty sure in Canada you would get out of this no problem.

Did the girl sign on agreement? If she didn't then how would it matter what she said. If the father is restricted from saying anything then he can't, but if he didn't then what is the problem.

"You're an idiot" then ignore the expert and report him.

Radio Shack has to honor the deal, they have to provide what they said they would.

There is no way a rock can be older then 6000 years, it's impossible, of course so is logical and creationism.