Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 06:39:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: It is not worth it, the web is dying. I was stunned to see this chart of mobile web usage in the US: https://mobile.twitter.com/asymco/status/777915894659964928 They just spend increasingly more time in twitter when not at home.

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 3 November 2016 at 06:11:08 UTC, Joakim wrote: On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 10:04:02 UTC, Patrick Schluter wrote: On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 06:39:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: It is not worth it, the web is dying. I was stunned to see this chart of mobile web usage in the US:

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 10:04:02 UTC, Patrick Schluter wrote: On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 06:39:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: It is not worth it, the web is dying. I was stunned to see this chart of mobile web usage in the US: https://mobile.twitter.com/asymco/status/777915894659964928

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 at 06:04:41 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 09:52:55 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On 10/30/2016 06:35 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: But what I meant was LLVM will have a wasm backend. Yes, but it is developed so slowly and conservatively, that coming up

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 09:52:55 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On 10/30/2016 06:35 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: But what I meant was LLVM will have a wasm backend. Yes, but it is developed so slowly and conservatively, that coming up with own proof-of-concept backend may be a chance to win early

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/30/2016 06:35 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: > But what I meant was LLVM will have a wasm backend. Yes, but it is developed so slowly and conservatively, that coming up with own proof-of-concept backend may be a chance to win early interest. They may speed up greatly though when WebAssembly

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/30/2016 07:53 AM, Walter Bright wrote: > On 10/29/2016 10:30 PM, Dicebot wrote: >> At the same time intended wasm spec >> (https://github.com/WebAssembly/design) is >> much more simple than machine code for something like x86_64. If >> Walter gets >> interested, that may be a feasible path

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 05:30:04 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Saturday, 29 October 2016 at 21:46:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Any thoughts on how much work is involved to port the runtime? And what other changes might be involved? The chap that used the C backend for LLVM wrote a little mini

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 06:39:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: It is not worth it, the web is dying. I was stunned to see this chart of mobile web usage in the US: https://mobile.twitter.com/asymco/status/777915894659964928 This isn't some third-world country with mostly 2G usage, the web

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Sunday, 30 October 2016 at 05:53:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 10/29/2016 10:30 PM, Dicebot wrote: At the same time intended wasm spec (https://github.com/WebAssembly/design) is much more simple than machine code for something like x86_64. If Walter gets interested, that may be a

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/29/2016 10:30 PM, Dicebot wrote: At the same time intended wasm spec (https://github.com/WebAssembly/design) is much more simple than machine code for something like x86_64. If Walter gets interested, that may be a feasible path :) I looked at it for 5 minutes :-) and it looks like

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Saturday, 29 October 2016 at 21:46:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: Any thoughts on how much work is involved to port the runtime? And what other changes might be involved? The chap that used the C backend for LLVM wrote a little mini runtime but I guess didn't have to worry about the version

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 16:14:03 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On 10/27/2016 07:12 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 16:01:26 UTC, Chris wrote: On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 15:54:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Thursday, October 27, 2016 15:42:53 Chris via

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 22:53:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Eliminating loops is something D adds, and goes even further to making code a straight line. A problem for myself and probably many programmers, is some of the tricks like what Linus did simply doesn't come to mind because

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 16:14:03 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On 10/27/2016 07:12 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 16:01:26 UTC, Chris wrote: On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 15:54:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Thursday, October 27, 2016 15:42:53 Chris via

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/27/2016 07:12 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: > On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 16:01:26 UTC, Chris wrote: >> On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 15:54:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >>> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 15:42:53 Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote: Not easy to be smart with Javascript ;)

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 16:01:26 UTC, Chris wrote: On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 15:54:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Thursday, October 27, 2016 15:42:53 Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote: Not easy to be smart with Javascript ;) Sure, it is. Avoid it. ;) - Jonathan M Davis I

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 15:54:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Thursday, October 27, 2016 15:42:53 Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote: Not easy to be smart with Javascript ;) Sure, it is. Avoid it. ;) - Jonathan M Davis I wish I could! I wish we had DScript for browsers!

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 15:42:53 Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote: > Not easy to be smart with Javascript ;) Sure, it is. Avoid it. ;) - Jonathan M Davis

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 22:53:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e Dunno, I wouldn't expect an

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 14:54:59 UTC, Idan Arye wrote: I'd like to point to Joel Spolsky excellent article "Five Worlds" - http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/FiveWorlds.html TL;DR: Joel Spolsky argues that different types("worlds") of developments require different qualities and

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 22:53:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e This is something we could all

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/27/2016 11:24 AM, qznc wrote: > I'm unsure about Linus' version. For this example, I agree that it is > elegant. It is fine in this specific case, because everything is local > within a single function. In general, the trick to use a pointer to the > element probably not a good idea. > >

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Thursday, 27 October 2016 at 08:24:54 UTC, qznc wrote: On Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 09:54:31 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On 10/26/2016 12:53 AM, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible:

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 09:54:31 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On 10/26/2016 12:53 AM, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible:

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/26/2016 4:21 PM, sarn wrote: I like using D's nested functions for simplifying code in the same kind of way. Sometimes a tiny helper function can make a big difference. I've also found that nested functions can nicely fix spaghetti code.

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 10:48:34 UTC, Marco Leise wrote: On a more controversial note, I sometimes replace nested blocks of conditionals and loops with flat spaghetti code and goto with verbose labels. There are situations where you can explain straight forward what needs to be done

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/26/2016 6:20 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: I find the most elegant bug fixes tend to be the ones with an overall reduction of code. Though, sometimes things are rotten to the core and that net change of -10 lines comes from a +330, -340 diff Elegant fixes tend to mean a refactoring is

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/26/2016 06:42 AM, Walter Bright wrote: Reminds me of: 1. newbie - follows the rules because he's told to 2. master - follows the rules because he understands them 3. guru - breaks the rules because he understands that they don't apply I always liked that principle. Tao Te Ching, if I'm

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 22:53:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e What would you say is the best

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 22:53:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e This is something we could all

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 09:41:42 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: 6. Nearly all bugs can be fixed with under 10 lines of code, and quite a few with 1 line. It's always a red flag for me when a fix PR has 200+ lines of code (test case lines of code don't count, neither do comments). I find

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 09:41:42 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: 7. If you're stuck on a programming problem, go out for a jog. I often find the answer that way. What can I say, it works for me. It's a common way to solve problem. Just concentrate yourself on something more pratical than

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Wednesday, 26 October 2016 at 09:41:42 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 10/25/2016 5:19 PM, bluecat wrote: [snip] I largely agree with your points 1.-7. (especially 1. and 7.). Also that gathering the data and acting upon it should be separate. However, principles might be at loggerheads.

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

Am Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:53:54 -0700 schrieb Walter Bright : > It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where > possible: > > https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e > >

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/26/2016 2:54 AM, Dicebot wrote: I find it both funny and saddening how many reddit commentators complained about Linus version of that code is over-complicated. "Prefer clear code over smart code" principle is good in general but sometimes it is over-applied to the point where

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/25/2016 3:53 PM, Walter Bright wrote: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e The Hacker News thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12793624

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/26/2016 12:53 AM, Walter Bright wrote: > It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals > where possible: > > https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e I find it both funny and saddening how many

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On 10/25/2016 5:19 PM, bluecat wrote: Interesting, that's going in my tips.txt file. Quick question, if you don't mind. What would be the top three things you've learned that significantly made you a better programmer? Ha, great question. Never thought about it before. Off the top of my head:

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 03:53:54PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where > possible: > > https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e > > This is

Re: Linus' idea of "good taste" code

On Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 22:53:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e This is something we could all

Linus' idea of "good taste" code

It's a small bit, but the idea here is to eliminate if conditionals where possible: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.nhth1eo4e This is something we could all do better at. Making code a straight path makes it easier to reason