On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 06:48:26PM +0000, n a wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 09:25:45PM -0700, Colin Corr wrote:
> >> I favor Python as my scripting language of choice, though I admit that
> >> it takes 12 lines of py code to do the same as 3 lines of pl code... but
> >> at least 6 months down the road, I can still figure out what my (or
> >> someone else's) py script is doing upon review.... without a reference
> >> guide, or contextual details.
>
> http://www.paulgraham.com/power.html
ugh. this article totally rubs me the wrong way. it's imprecise. it
has an agenda, which is to say it's trying to accomplish something other
than honestly seeking a real answer. This agenda is seen by the
un-asked questions, which brings up my third grievance: the argument is
poorly made.
sorry for bitching, but the paper just bugged the crap out of me. so...
I hope I haven't offended anyone. succinctness is good, but there's a
lot more to a good language than how few lines it can create a useful
program in. a brilliant and funny programmer I know likes to say "perl
is a write only language" because you can write with it, but you sure as
hell can't read what you've written. :) He and I love perl, but it's
pretty damned easy to make unmaintainable code with it.
good algorithm things:
- succinctness
- clarity of the algorithm, understandability
- meaningful organization
- simple inclusion and use of hidden, well maintained, library code
- ... long list ...
good languages don't just make those things possible. they encourage
and support them. all of them.
damn... for instance, this sloppy paragraph:
"So there is no argument about that-- at least, not from me. Individual
programs can certainly be too succinct for their own good. The question
is, can a language be? Can a language compel programmers to write code
that's short (in elements) at the expense of overall readability?"
he asks: "Can a language compel programmers..."
Such an obvious, rhetorical question has no place in any paper that even
pretends to be serious.
/* C programmers know they shouldn't do this. but they do. is the
* language at fault? you could make a very convincing argument that
* yes it is. still, the language itself isn't the direct cause... */
if( stupidthing = neverdothisinC ) {
/* whatever */
}
_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
