http://qs1969.pair.com?node_id=502336


in reply to Re^3: RFC hierarchic modelling documentation
in thread RFC hierarchic modelling documentation

2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?

By that criterion, perl is definitely not good software. I guess that shows that (1) is a fair bit more important than (2). :-)

(Sorry for the topic drift.)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Good software
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Oct 23, 2005 at 23:10 UTC
    Oh, most definitely! The code for the perl program most definitely is not maintainable. That, in fact, was a large part of the initial impetus for Perl6, way back when.

    And, yes, (1) is much more important that (2). If it doesn't work, it doesn't matter if it's maintainable. :-)


    My criteria for good software:
    1. Does it work?
    2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?