@garybernhardt linked to a short academic paper on code readability, called “What Makes Code Hard to Understand?”. It’s a quick read that details an experiment where researchers showed severals versions of the same program to a bunch of programmers and asked them to guess the output. Each version had the same cyclomatic complexity and lines of code, but differed only in formatting, variable naming, and use of types.

Choice quote:

The physical aspects of notation, often considered superficial, can have a profound impact on performance [of programmers to understand what code will do]

In particular, in a program that relied on order of operations, two versions were given, one in which one space was used around operators (zigzag) and another where the operators were all vertically aligned (linedup):

Programmers were more likely to respect the order of mathematical operations in the linedup version of whitespace, showing how horizontal space can emphasize the common structure between related calculations.

Also, they presented three versions of code to calculate the area of a rectangle, using free variables, tuples, and a Rectangle class:

Programmers took longer to respond to the tuples version of rectangle despite it having fewer lines than the class version. It is not uncommon in Python to use tuples for (x, y) coordinates, but the syntactic “noise” that is present in the tuples version for variable names (e.g., r1_xy_1) and calculations (e.g., width = xy_2[0] - xy_1[0]) likely gave programmers pause when verifying the code’s operation.

This was not something that was initially obvious to me as I learned programming, but I have come to realize the importance of typography in writing code. From my post on the subject over a year ago:

But, it’s not just the content - the code itself - that affects readability. How it’s presented matters and if we’re going to talk about presentation, we have to talk about typography.