4 ms·
The obvious counterpoint to this is brainfuck. A few examples: ,+[-.[-]-,+] >>[-]<<[->>+<<] >++++++++[-<+++++++++>]<.>>+>-[+]++>++>+++[>[->+++<<
by reificator 7y ago
The obvious counterpoint to this is brainfuck. A few examples:
,+[-.[-]-,+]
>>[-]<<[->>+<<]
>++++++++[-<+++++++++>]<.>>+>-[+]++>++>+++[>[->+++<<+++>]<<]>-----.>->+++..+++.>-.<<+[>[+>+]>>]<--------------.>>.+++.------.--------.>+.>+.
So. Now that we've established that syntax "beauty" matters in an extreme case, can we agree that people can have different opinions about where the line is?
Can we then agree that having an opinion different than your own does not make someone an inherently less senior(???) or capable developer?
- nightcracker 7y agoActually, Brainfuck has excellent syntax. The language is very limited, but within those limits the syntax is as clear as can be.
- heavenlyblue 7y agoNo, we won’t agree here because brainfuck is clear and concise. There’s no duplicity in what the operator may mean depending on the context so it most perfectly fulfils this role - is it the emojis you’d like to see there? I have a strong opinion that you should like everything. Are you going to make a point that your genetic makeup somehow prefers tabs over spaces? :)