On 10/8/13 10:00 AM, Dicebot wrote:
proper performance
I apologize for picking out your post, Dicebot, as the illustrative example, but I see this pop up in various discussion and I've been meaning to comment on it for a while.
Please stop using words like 'proper', 'real', and other similar terms to describe a requirement. It's a horrible specifier and adds no useful detail.
It tends to needlessly setup the convarsation as confrontational or adversarial and implies that anyone that disagrees is wrong or not working on a real system. There's lots of cases where pushing to the very edge of bleeding isn't actually required.
Thanks, Brad
