3 ms·

For me, the answer is - The code that never existed. Not to sound cheeky but eliminating code, is a beautiful thing. Less code is easier to maintain, understan

For me, the answer is - The code that never existed. Not to sound cheeky but eliminating code, is a beautiful thing. Less code is easier to maintain, understand, and faster to run. So the less code you can achieve, the better overall the software will be.

seisvelas 7y ago
Deleting code is a beautiful feeling. Python's new walrus operator has gotten a lot of hate recently, but a few days ago I was writing a script and realized I could get rid of a few lines (AND have my meaning be clearer) using the walrus operator. So satisfying.
- macintux 7y ago
  As a fan of Erlang’s pattern matching, the walrus operator feels like an obvious win. I do, however, resent Python 3 for removing pattern matching on tuples in function heads.
tuesdayrain 7y ago
> For me, the answer is - The code that never existed. > Not to sound cheeky but eliminating code, is a beautiful thing. Less code is easier to maintain, understand, and faster to run. So the less code you can achieve, the better overall the software will be. Unless you think compressed/ minified code is beautiful, there must be additional factors involved other than minimizing LoC.
- seisvelas 7y ago
  To me it's removing lines of code without affecting readability (or even improving it). Like when you don't know about a language feature so you implement a hacky version, then find out there's already a very elegant standard way to do it so you get to lance that hideous monstrosity you made off your code
abaga129 7y ago
https://github.com/kelseyhightower/nocode/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/kelseyhightower/nocode/blob/master/README... you're welcome
zmix 7y ago
This brings me to a very nice regular expression. It is the one being recommended in RFC3986 "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax" by T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding and L. Masinter https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 to parse an URI. Having seen so many regular expressions, that try to match it all, this regex tries to match as little as possible, while, at the same time, matches any string, because it matches no string. It does not define what to match, but what not to match and making every match optional. According part from the spec: ^(([^:/?#]+):)?(//([^/?#]*))?([^?#]*)(\?([^#]*))?(#(.*))? 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The numbers in the second line above are only to assist readability; they indicate the reference points for each subexpression (i.e., each paired parenthesis). We refer to the value matched for subexpression <n> as $<n>. For example, matching the above expression to http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/uri/#Related results in the following subexpression matches: $1 = http: $2 = http $3 = //www.ics.uci.edu $4 = www.ics.uci.edu $5 = /pub/ietf/uri/ $6 = <undefined> $7 = <undefined> $8 = #Related $9 = Related where <undefined> indicates that the component is not present, as is the case for the query component in the above example. Therefore, we can determine the value of the five components as scheme = $2 authority = $4 path = $5 query = $7 fragment = $9
- mstade 7y ago
  One of my favorite RFCs for sure, and it's a beautifully simple and useful regex. It's a shame RFCs seem to have fallen out of fashion, the WHATWG URL spec is an unreadable mess of a monster, not least the parsing section: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing
yzh 7y ago
Reminds me of a saying I read from moderngpu library's wiki page, a highly optimized yet highly readable GPU basic primitive library: "Software is an asset, code a liability. On good days I'd add 200 or 300 lines to this repository. On great days I'd subtract 500." source: https://github.com/moderngpu/moderngpu/wiki/Introduction https://github.com/moderngpu/moderngpu/wiki/Introduction
Izkata 7y ago
The original `true` was a 0-byte executable file [0] (well, perhaps 1 byte for the newline character). Sadly, that is not longer the case. [0] https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/419697/why-are-true-and-false-so-large https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/419697/why-are-true...

seisvelas 7y ago

Deleting code is a beautiful feeling. Python's new walrus operator has gotten a lot of hate recently, but a few days ago I was writing a script and realized I could get rid of a few lines (AND have my meaning be clearer) using the walrus operator. So satisfying.

macintux 7y ago
As a fan of Erlang’s pattern matching, the walrus operator feels like an obvious win. I do, however, resent Python 3 for removing pattern matching on tuples in function heads.

tuesdayrain 7y ago

> For me, the answer is - The code that never existed. > Not to sound cheeky but eliminating code, is a beautiful thing. Less code is easier to maintain, understand, and faster to run. So the less code you can achieve, the better overall the software will be. Unless you think compressed/ minified code is beautiful, there must be additional factors involved other than minimizing LoC.

seisvelas 7y ago
To me it's removing lines of code without affecting readability (or even improving it). Like when you don't know about a language feature so you implement a hacky version, then find out there's already a very elegant standard way to do it so you get to lance that hideous monstrosity you made off your code

abaga129 7y ago

https://github.com/kelseyhightower/nocode/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/kelseyhightower/nocode/blob/master/README... you're welcome

zmix 7y ago

This brings me to a very nice regular expression. It is the one being recommended in RFC3986 "Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax" by T. Berners-Lee, R. Fielding and L. Masinter https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 to parse an URI. Having seen so many regular expressions, that try to match it all, this regex tries to match as little as possible, while, at the same time, matches any string, because it matches no string. It does not define what to match, but what not to match and making every match optional. According part from the spec: ^(([^:/?#]+):)?(//([^/?#]*))?([^?#]*)(\?([^#]*))?(#(.*))? 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The numbers in the second line above are only to assist readability; they indicate the reference points for each subexpression (i.e., each paired parenthesis). We refer to the value matched for subexpression <n> as $<n>. For example, matching the above expression to http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/uri/#Related results in the following subexpression matches: $1 = http: $2 = http $3 = //www.ics.uci.edu $4 = www.ics.uci.edu $5 = /pub/ietf/uri/ $6 = <undefined> $7 = <undefined> $8 = #Related $9 = Related where <undefined> indicates that the component is not present, as is the case for the query component in the above example. Therefore, we can determine the value of the five components as scheme = $2 authority = $4 path = $5 query = $7 fragment = $9

mstade 7y ago
One of my favorite RFCs for sure, and it's a beautifully simple and useful regex. It's a shame RFCs seem to have fallen out of fashion, the WHATWG URL spec is an unreadable mess of a monster, not least the parsing section: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-parsing

yzh 7y ago

Reminds me of a saying I read from moderngpu library's wiki page, a highly optimized yet highly readable GPU basic primitive library: "Software is an asset, code a liability. On good days I'd add 200 or 300 lines to this repository. On great days I'd subtract 500." source: https://github.com/moderngpu/moderngpu/wiki/Introduction https://github.com/moderngpu/moderngpu/wiki/Introduction

Izkata 7y ago

The original `true` was a 0-byte executable file [0] (well, perhaps 1 byte for the newline character). Sadly, that is not longer the case. [0] https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/419697/why-are-true-and-false-so-large https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/419697/why-are-true...