Re: Perl's own Duff's device?

Personally I am of the opinon that if there a a clear consise way to do something, then it should be done that way unless there is a really good reason for make it complicated and I think that most people would agree with me.

Code quality naturally degrades the more people modify it. I don't see any reason to contribute to that by intentionally writing complicated code.

Comment on Re: Perl's own Duff's device?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Perl's own Duff's device? by blazar (Canon) on Dec 22, 2005 at 16:40 UTC
I agree with you, do not misunderstand me! It all boils down to what you mean by "complicated". For example there may be a very concise way to do something that would also be fast, but may end up being unclear except possibly for very expert programmers and that the "simpler" solutions may all end up being... ehm... more complicated! Indeed I was specifically asking about personal experiences with situations in which there were "really good reasons to make it complicated", because I don't recall any in my own experience, but others may well have! Just being curious, you know...	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Perl's own Duff's device?
by blazar (Canon) on Dec 22, 2005 at 16:40 UTC

I agree with you, do not misunderstand me! It all boils down to what you mean by "complicated". For example there may be a very concise way to do something that would also be fast, but may end up being unclear except possibly for very expert programmers and that the "simpler" solutions may all end up being... ehm... more complicated!

Indeed I was specifically asking about personal experiences with situations in which there were "really good reasons to make it complicated", because I don't recall any in my own experience, but others may well have! Just being curious, you know...

[reply]