Re: lexical question - recursion, capitalizing names

Subject: Re: lexical question - recursion, capitalizing names
From: Lisa Kaytes <lisa_cavaliere-kaytes -at- WARREN -dot- MENTORG -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 12:17:50 EDT

Len writes:

> Regarding using different fonts to distinguish keywords, use of fonts in
> technical documents in general is a style decision you make before
> beginning to write. I've heard the arguments about the distractive
> quality of having too much boldface on a page, and it depends upon the
> number of things in a book you emphasize or distinguish by using a
> special font....

I'm also from the "camp" that believes the use of too much boldface or
different fonts decreases the readability of a page. When showing
the usage of a function in an example, I display what the user would enter
in a Courier (monospace) font on a separate line. However, when using the
function name in descriptive text, I display it in the same font as the
rest of the paragraph. IMHO, the same goes for parantheses; if parantheses
are a required part of the function syntax, then I would use them on a
separate line that illustrates the syntax. For example, "The syntax of the add
function is:

add (<element_name> <location>)

where ..."

If you haved defined something as a function and your users understand
that functions typically have required and/or optional arguments, what
is the purpose of the extra empty parantheses next to the function_name()?
(i.e., parantheses could be used to emphasize that a function
has arguments, but is this emphasis necessary or meaningful?)

lisa -at- warren -dot- mentorg -dot- com

Previous by Author: Re: Job needs
Next by Author: Re: capitalizing function names
Previous by Thread: Re: lexical question - recursion, capitalizing names
Next by Thread: Re: lexical question - recursion, capitalizing names

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads