well you can't hit a girl anyway as thats wrong... so i understand the
gender association.


On 5/15/05, Tom Kerr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 10:09:29AM +1000, Scott Barnes wrote:
> > 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!".
> 
> My problems tend to come from picking up entire projects following this
> pattern.  One file? "sigh, poor bugger, I know where he was coming
> from."  One set of coherent modules? "hrm, bit of a rough job, bet the
> power bills were overdue that month."  Not one project but a whole range
> of developments spanning 5 or more years?  "wtf! wtf! I'm going to find
> where this **** lives and ram these rowspans down his[1] throat".
> 
> Tom
> who doesn't like being on the "crunch" end of the process described
> below
> 
> [1] The self-righteous anger is somehow more satisfying if I can give a
> definite gender to the declared victim.  Even if it's wrong.
> 
> = Quoted matter only below this point =
> >
> > 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
> ~sigsnip~
> 
> ---
> 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