My comment itself is a good demonstration of the point I was trying to make. I anticipated the possibility of misunderstanding or misinterpretation of my first

My comment itself is a good demonstration of the point I was trying to make. I anticipated the possibility of misunderstanding or misinterpretation of my first statement and put in the time to add the second to qualify my point. I did not intend make a blanket generalization against quick and dirty solutions (ref: google about Doug McIlroy and Don Knuth trying to solve the same problem[1]). I am in fact stressing that there exists a tradeoff that needs to be considered. Usually the tradeoff is made towards less work (ie: lazy programmers) -- less work for the foreseeable future (and if you can't forsee at least somewhat in the future, you're not doing it right). By responding to just the first part of my comment you've confirmed the last part. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=literate+programming+the+word+count+problem https://www.google.com/search?q=literate+programming+the+wor... edit: I mistaken said Bill Joy instead of Doug MaIlroy initially