Re: Malcolm's new book

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 19:16:10 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:

Kelsey Bjarnason said:

<snip>

All I can say is I'll take ugly code that works
over pretty code that's broken, any day.

I'll take readable code that doesn't *quite* work over unreadable code
that does work, any day. Readable code can be fixed.

If it's unreadable and works, it still works - you can ignore it. :)

My problem with code such as Malcolm's is more fundamental; if he's made
this egregiously bad decision here, what other egregiously bad decisions
has he made elsewhere, ones which are not necessarily so easy to spot?

Bugs is one thing; we all have those. This, to me, is more like using
void main(); there's absolutely no good reason for it, and a coder who
does it probably has other bad habits - just how much can you actually
trust anything he's written, without an in-depth analysis which, in
theory, you shouldn't have to perform were it professionally done in the
first place?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Malcolms new book
    ... Kelsey Bjarnason said: ... I'll take readable code that doesn't *quite* work over unreadable code ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: A quick if question
    ... Hamilton wrote: ... I often wonder why C should use parentheses for things like this. ... It hardly provides for the most readable code in the world, ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Optimization in coding style
    ... Michal Wozniak wrote: ... > Hmmm... ... > I really like to write readable code. ...
    (comp.lang.php)