imho if you all get to a stage like that, and you have to write dirty
code... put that in the comments.

"its not pretty, tight deadline and brainstrust needs output not a
case study...sorry to the person who must follow this code - SB Out.".

That way when a co-developer picks it up they can go "uhuh...no probs,
i understand...*sigh* lets have a crack at it now"..

otherwise they may go:

"wtf!..wtf! serial list..tabl....wtf!....this guy/gals a freakin hack!".



On 5/14/05, Ayudh Nagara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ah... the Metaphysics of Quality...
> 
> And what is good, Phaedrus,
> And what is not good,
> Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?
> 
> - Robert M. Pirsig
> 
> 
> Chad Renando wrote:
> > When I worked in a Printed Circuit Board manufacturing company, the
> > Quality Manager and I had this discussion about the definition of
> > "quality".  We could put in hundreds of thousands of dollars in
> > equipment and controls to ensure the circuit boards were within near
> > perfect tolerance.  But the guy wanting a simple punch-and-crunch
> > circuit board could care less.
> >
> > Bottom line, the quality of your code depends on the application.
> > Your code is your calling card, be it for your personal resume or your
> > company's portfolio.  If the employer you are after or the clients you
> > are targeting don't care, then punch-and-crunch code is just fine.
> > It's all about defining the Objectives and the Audience.
> >
> > For me, I am grateful for these discussions, as they help define this
> > moving standard of quality as it pertains to the at-times esoteric
> > term of "best practice".
> >
> > Chad
> > who finds his definition of "quality" depends on if he can be bothered
> > applying himself that day
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/14/05, Tom Kerr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 10:10:13AM +1000, Chad Renando wrote:
> >>
> >>>It does seem as though adherance to one line of thought or another
> >>>fits within religious ideals.  Personally, I consider the adherance to
> >>>CSS to fall in the religions of:
> >>>
> >>>"Expansion of Seperation",
> >>>where after you seperate into MVC, you seperate your View into Style
> >>>and Content.
> >>>
> >>>and
> >>>
> >>>"Weight Reduction"
> >>>the zealous reduction of the amount of code required for a given 
> >>>functionlaity
> >>>
> >>>At the moment, with regards to the faiths of "best practice", I am a
> >>>pagan like Sagan, ascribing to the religion of:
> >>>
> >>>"Get It Out"
> >>>where you pump out good functionality with crap code and pray daily
> >>>that you'll know what you were thinking when it comes time to rebuild
> >>>
> >>>Chad
> >>
> >>~snip~
> >>
> >>This brings up an interesting (to me, anyway) question.  I guess to my
> >>mind that the seperation is "what is correct" versus "what I know will
> >>work".  With respect to the CSS-P/Tables question, it's no secret that
> >>your table-based design, so long as it works in only a couple of
> >>browsers will be viewable by >95% of the viewing public, complete with
> >>all of the nice graphical features that the author intended.
> >>
> >>Similarly, for the end user, the back-end code that you write is
> >>entirely unimportant so long as it, within reasonable time, spits out
> >>some display information (be it HTML/Flash/SVG/whatever) that lets them
> >>see what they want to see.
> >>
> >>Personally I cringe when the word from on high is that something needs
> >>to be finished yesterday, and the easiest way to make it work
> >>-right now- is to make a page rely on a user having javascript, or
> >>cookies.  I cringe when I think of the poor maintainer who has to work
> >>out why on earth I stored a comma seperated list in a database table
> >>instead of splitting it into several fields allowing them to use SQL
> >>selection criteria in their search.  Yet the
> >>client/non-technical boss/accounting department are chuffed when it
> >>'just works'.
> >>
> >>In my own way I'm a pagan of sorts, I do much of my home web browsing in
> >>a text-only browser, and I turn javascript off in my graphical browser
> >>unless I want it on for a particular reason.
> >>
> >>And now, the question: should my responsibility to my employer be to
> >>a) Get the thing out the door.  Damned be your warm fuzzy feelings of
> >>   doing something right when we just want to get the job finished and
> >>   get paid for it.
> >>
> >>b) Do what I consider to be the best job I can, and try to explain to an
> >>   employer who will never see the back-end code and never turn off
> >>   cookies that while a majority are, not everyone is in the same
> >>   situation as he is.
> >>
> >>What's the balance between moral imperatives and 'getting the job done'?
> >>
> >>-T
> >>
> >>---
> >>You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
> >>
> 
> --
> Regards: Ayudh
> 
> +----------------------------------------------------------------+
> | SOAP is the glue! Hook up your server directly to your bank.   |
> | Connect to VeriPay xServ, the Australian Payments Web Service. |
> | Reliable, Secure, FAST: http://www.xilo.com/xserv              |
> +----------------------------------------------------------------+
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
> 


-- 
Regards,
Scott Barnes
http://www.mossyblog.com
http://www.flexcoder.com (Coming Soon)

---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/

Reply via email to