3 ms·
I 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 -
by w56rjrtyu6ru 7y ago
I 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.