I'm still in cubicle land- and the ONLY time I can get anything productive done, is between 6-8am. After that, there is just way too much noise. Even headphones don't really help.
Too complex to be easily understood by the programmer who will follow you.
As was pointed out elsewhere, sometimes it is reasonable (such as with DSP microcode assembly language) to assume that your code will never be maintained or read by a human being.
But for anything that contains a user interface, I'd say you need to use comments in your code. I know this goes against the Agile manifesto (which always struck me as silly that a methodology intended to make maintenance easier, actually makes it harder in real life- I guess it was never beta tested), but it is the truth. No matter what they tell you about the lifespan of your code, quadruple it. No matter what another programmer gives you for a time estimate to complete code, quadruple it. And six months down the road, your brilliant routine won't even be understandable to yourself without comments.
Re:Similar language, describing different things
on
Code Is Not Literature
·
· Score: 4, Informative
And yet, once again, I used to teach quicksort to 4th graders- when I was only an 8th grader myself. While it is possible that the general population has gotten significantly less intelligent in the intervening 30 years, it isn't very likely.
If you can't comment in plain english, then your code is not maintainable.
At one time, we used to teach fourth graders to code in BASIC in the United States.
If your routine is too complex, add comments.
Re:Similar language, describing different things
on
Code Is Not Literature
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Correct. And just like laws- if regular people can't read what you have written, then likely you are doing it wrong.
Bad law is always overly complex. The more complex it is, the more likely somebody has introduced some ambiguity.
Bad code is also always overly complex. The more complex it is, the more likely it will take a week to do a job that should take an hour when maintaining it.
It also occurs to me that with net neutrality now banned, the obvious way to do this would be to invite people to use an in-plane wifi that blocks skype and other voice chat programs.
Come to think of it, an in-plane satellite based high latency wifi system you wouldn't even need to filter for, it just plain wouldn't work.
I was with you right up to the ownership of production having fruits of labor. They largely don't. They rent their productive capability and live off of other people's fruits of labor.
Because the greatest threat to the domination of Windows over the Known Universe is human beings, we need to prevent them from being born- or even conceived.
Check out the Calapuya people of Oregon, who used field burning to encourage oak savannahs to grow. They had no permanent settlements during the summer (their villages were winter only) and their favorite method of hunting was to climb a hill, spot the prey, light a big fire around it, and wait for it to be done cooking.
One of their favorite foods was grasshoppers, but they'd kill bear and deer the same way.
I'm very much a theist who believes that the supernatural is just the natural that we human beings have not explained yet (whether that have not is due to just not having the time, or not having the ability since we're finite beings who know very little, is up in the air).
Slashdot Mirror
I think you picked the wrong decade, given the political situation. Competent management requires making decisions on some basis other than rank fear.
Also, slashdotting is neither productive nor creative.
True enough, because *slashdotting is quiet* and the only people who actually get noticed in an open plan office are those being loud.
Everybody else is trying to keep their head down and do their work to, and is only bothered by excessive noise.
I'm still in cubicle land- and the ONLY time I can get anything productive done, is between 6-8am. After that, there is just way too much noise. Even headphones don't really help.
Too complex to be easily understood by the programmer who will follow you.
As was pointed out elsewhere, sometimes it is reasonable (such as with DSP microcode assembly language) to assume that your code will never be maintained or read by a human being.
But for anything that contains a user interface, I'd say you need to use comments in your code. I know this goes against the Agile manifesto (which always struck me as silly that a methodology intended to make maintenance easier, actually makes it harder in real life- I guess it was never beta tested), but it is the truth. No matter what they tell you about the lifespan of your code, quadruple it. No matter what another programmer gives you for a time estimate to complete code, quadruple it. And six months down the road, your brilliant routine won't even be understandable to yourself without comments.
DSP is also single use. Next processor revision is going to be incompatible with it anyway.
It means your comments aren't explicit enough.
And yet, once again, I used to teach quicksort to 4th graders- when I was only an 8th grader myself. While it is possible that the general population has gotten significantly less intelligent in the intervening 30 years, it isn't very likely.
If you can't comment in plain english, then your code is not maintainable.
Quicksort is just a double direction bubble sort. Mergesort, I'd agree, might seem like voodoo. Heapsort? That's just a filing cabinet.
At one time, we used to teach fourth graders to code in BASIC in the United States.
If your routine is too complex, add comments.
Correct. And just like laws- if regular people can't read what you have written, then likely you are doing it wrong.
Bad law is always overly complex. The more complex it is, the more likely somebody has introduced some ambiguity.
Bad code is also always overly complex. The more complex it is, the more likely it will take a week to do a job that should take an hour when maintaining it.
So in what way is this any different than McDonalds noticing trends and building sandwiches before they are ordered?
All they need is to create a wag the dog incident by invading Taiwan.
Mod Parent up.
It also occurs to me that with net neutrality now banned, the obvious way to do this would be to invite people to use an in-plane wifi that blocks skype and other voice chat programs.
Come to think of it, an in-plane satellite based high latency wifi system you wouldn't even need to filter for, it just plain wouldn't work.
I was with you right up to the ownership of production having fruits of labor. They largely don't. They rent their productive capability and live off of other people's fruits of labor.
First link is slashdoted. You'd think somebody criticizing other people's code, would be able to write more robust code.
Because the greatest threat to the domination of Windows over the Known Universe is human beings, we need to prevent them from being born- or even conceived.
#1 most wanted feature: XP mode as an alternate UI.
Not when you can buy Red Bull and twinkies on a food stamp card.
So, the evolution of heterosexuality is to blame? That could be a pretty big thing to try to engineer around. How about single-gender software teams?
Check out the Calapuya people of Oregon, who used field burning to encourage oak savannahs to grow. They had no permanent settlements during the summer (their villages were winter only) and their favorite method of hunting was to climb a hill, spot the prey, light a big fire around it, and wait for it to be done cooking.
One of their favorite foods was grasshoppers, but they'd kill bear and deer the same way.
Supposedly both can be eliminated by adopting a geocentric universe in which orbits cannot be explained mathematically.
Or at least some of them.
I'm very much a theist who believes that the supernatural is just the natural that we human beings have not explained yet (whether that have not is due to just not having the time, or not having the ability since we're finite beings who know very little, is up in the air).
Why would all universes be governed by physical law?