4 ms·
Point 6. freaks me out, because I am not sure if I am one of them. Also, your first three points puts Ruby pretty much out of the picture. EDIT: Mentioned Rub
by sidcool 10y ago
Point 6. freaks me out, because I am not sure if I am one of them.
Also, your first three points puts Ruby pretty much out of the picture.
EDIT: Mentioned Ruby because that's what I am working on right now, after Java and Scala
- pklausler 10y agoYou can write buggy code in any language, and good code in any language. If Ruby's what you have to use, write good Ruby code. If the only reason you're not able to use something better is that you don't know anything better, then fix that when you can.
- lojack 10y agoHow exactly do the first five points put Ruby out of the picture? Sure, it isn't statically typed and allows mutable data, but I don't see how any of the remaining points couldn't apply.
- sidcool 10y agoTrue. First 3 points. Corrected.
- tunesmith 10y agoYou probably are not sloppy, because you are worried about being sloppy. The sloppy programmers are the ones that don't care about being sloppy. If you're conscientious, you have a huge leg up on a lot of other programmers.
- mhurron 10y agoSince 'sloppy' is going to be defined differently by basically everyone, this isn't true. That someone is worried about being sloppy really only lets you assume they don't write code they consider sloppy.
- afarrell 10y agoNot even that. They could believe that they are in a job where they are expected to move at a pace that implies sloppy code. Of course, that will actually mean they move much more slowly due to bug fixes, but a junior dev in an environment without a good senior dev can easily fall to the "quick and dirty" fallacy.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]