in reply to Should I leave behind beautiful code or readable code?
For counterpoint. One wonders how many of those who are advocating dumbing down this simple code, actually had any trouble understanding it? There is a common theme here where people tend to say: I understand it now, but a maintenance programmer (or you) 6 months from now may not. Even though they have just encountered the code for the first time and so are in exactly the same position as the mythical maintenance programmer will be in 6 months from now.
With the exception of the possible abiguity of the use of / / as the parameter to split--which in the light of knowledge of the code, may not be ambiguous at all--anyone not immediately able to understand this code, should probably not be maintaining Perl code anyway.
What is the point of using a Very High Level Language (VHLL), if you mandate not using it's high level facilities? If these people ever opt to use Perl 6, they will only ever use 50% of it facilities, because they will reject the rest on the basis that it is too complex.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^2: Should I leave behind beautiful code or readable code?
by bart (Canon) on Mar 28, 2007 at 11:50 UTC | |
by Preceptor (Deacon) on Mar 30, 2007 at 10:44 UTC | |
|
Re^2: Should I leave behind beautiful code or readable code?
by f00li5h (Chaplain) on Mar 28, 2007 at 12:00 UTC | |
|
Re^2: Should I leave behind beautiful code or readable code?
by Cap'n Steve (Friar) on Apr 01, 2007 at 07:55 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Apr 01, 2007 at 08:26 UTC | |
by Cap'n Steve (Friar) on Apr 02, 2007 at 08:19 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Apr 02, 2007 at 10:42 UTC | |
by Cap'n Steve (Friar) on Apr 03, 2007 at 07:12 UTC |