4 ms·
In absence of more accessible complexity measurements, line counts do matter somewhat. E.g. the briefer a program is, the more readable it is (last time I check
by w56rjrtyu6ru 7y ago
In absence of more accessible complexity measurements, line counts do matter somewhat. E.g. the briefer a program is, the more readable it is (last time I checked, brainpower and time is much more expensive than computing power and bandwidth.)
The Node example has zero external dependencies outside of the Node.js standard library.
- pushpop 7y ago> In absence of more accessible complexity measurements, line counts do matter somewhat. E.g. the briefer a program is, the more readable it is (last time I checked, brainpower and time is much more expensive than computing power and bandwidth.) There are as many exceptions to that rule are there are examples when it’s true. Code golfing, minifified code, shell 1 liners, Perl, etc. Line counts mean jack shit.
- w56rjrtyu6ru 7y agoI would argue that even an esoteric, densely packed one-liner can still be more readable than the equivalent program spread out over a greater number of lines - simply because you can keep it all in sight at the same time and work through it without losing the bigger picture. But of course, scary symbols is scary.
- mises 7y agoSo you'd like to use APL, then? He didn't say symbols. Verbose code can be much easier, though stupidly verbose is stupid. Compromise is, as usual, the best solution.
- w56rjrtyu6ru 7y agoAny character is a symbol, and an unfamiliar string of characters, ASCII or otherwise, is perceived by the unaccustomed eye as "a string of unfamiliar symbols" simply because at a glance you have no idea what it means. As for APL, in fact I would try it, it's one of the more interesting relics that sometimes surface on HN. What could I achieve with it though? Many nice things have been lost to ecosystem fatigue even if a spec stays the same. Compromise is best of course. "Halfway happy."
- pushpop 7y agoI’m guessing from the fact that you’ve literally just created this account to post these ridiculous statements that you’re nothing more than a troll account.
- w56rjrtyu6ru 7y agoI've created this account with my very own purpose, what about you? It is to lurk less, and it's the first account that sticks because this time I remembered to whitelist HN in my cookie autodeleter. Nevertheless, it is you who choose to engage with my comments on such a dismissive note. I am prepared that my statements will initially be called ridiculous, but speaking one's mind is a great way to learn faster and there's always plenty to catch up with.
- ljm 7y agoWell, compared to a shell script or a static binary...the Node example requires you to have Node (+ NPM) on your machine and, unless you wrap it all up for homebrew/apt/some other package repo. you're going to be using `npm install -g` to use it as opposed to shoving an executable into your PATH. All of your stated benefits are nice for the maintainer but mean little to the end user. This gushing praise for Node reads like nobody has ever built elegant CLI apps until Ryan Dahl turned of age and put JS on a server.
- w56rjrtyu6ru 7y agoThe Node example has zero external dependencies other than its the interpreter. `chmod +x`, put it in /usr/local/bin if you're feeling especially sacrilegious today, and that's it. > All of your stated benefits are nice for the maintainer but mean little to the end user. I fail to see how better tools for authors and maintainers don't result in better software for end users. > This gushing praise for Node reads like nobody has ever built elegant CLI apps until Ryan Dahl turned of age and put JS on a server. And what of it? Node makes building CLI apps accessible to an ever wider audience. I'm just putting my "glowing review" out there to counteract all the naysayers who like to piss on Node because it's JavaScript, usually without even _attempting_ to make an argumented case against it.