3 ms·

I didn't bother reading more than the first few paragraphs. I expect the quality of writing to be a few notches above the level of speech. This article's style

I didn't bother reading more than the first few paragraphs. I expect the quality of writing to be a few notches above the level of speech. This article's style simply doesn't cut it, mostly because of excessive jovialness.

phomer 18y ago
Generally, I try to write more formally, but then I often get complaints about being too stiff and too long. The crazy bit about blogging is that there is at least one complaint for everything you write. Just proves that you can't make everybody happy. Still, I liked it :-)
nostrademons 18y ago
From about 3/4 of the way through: "In point of fact, if this whole article is "TL;DR" then there is no way you're code is going to be "great". Just ain't happening. It may be a hell of lot of other things, most of which are destined to entertain people on WTF, but it certainly ain't ever going to be great, and probably not even good."
- Hexstream 18y ago
  It's not too long, it's too badly written (as exemplified by this "you're" among other things). There's none of Yegge's articles I didn't read fully once I started and I don't need to tell you how long they are. edit: I read the whole thing, it's really horrible how the bad style and orthograph makes it hard to focus on what's said. Speaking of focus, it's really ironic to get a big lecture about how important the ability to focus is coming from someone who can't even focus enough to write proper English (your/you're, their/they're, come on): "If you are finding that reading a multi-page blog essay is far too long, then you are clearly having problems focusing. [...] However, it's not all bad. If you've made it this far -- and it wasn't just blind luck in skipping text -- then it means you do have some ability to focus. It might just be a good idea to work on that a little, or possible a lot. Focus. Focus. Focus." Stylistic issues and common deformations (ya, ain't, cause) aside, here's the objective mistakes I found: "Get on with it", *you're* inner voice is screaming, adding in "just give me the *highlites*, the bullet points, the summary, dude. These things may help you if you've already had exposure, but they just ain't *the* got the knowledge in them. If you want the knowledge then *you've have* to get the knowledge, otherwise you know nothing. "Well, I don't want to waste my precious time read someone else's long rambling crud!", *you're might* be screaming by now. [...] But *its* impossible to squish all of the knowledge into summary. [...] Honestly, *you* a roving accident waiting to happen. [...] Ponder it, *its* not hard once you get used to it. If they're out there telling you otherwise, you know *their* just blowing smoke. [...] then *you're* problem is [...] then there is no way *you're* code is going to be "great" As a last point, I found him pretty unwarrantly condescending.
  - phomer 18y ago
    The deformations are there on purpose, I was trying to give it an edgy style, otherwise it just doesn't appeal to the audience I am trying to reach. I fixed the other typos, as there were unintentional, just a byproduct of fast sloppy editing :-) It's writing, and it's an opinion, so I rather get it out there with a few typos, spelling mistakes and bad grammar, then just sit on it forever.
    - swombat 18y ago
      Giving it an edgy style is one thing. Giving birth to an incoherent and pointless rant is another. In this case, I'm afraid you failed and did the second one.

phomer 18y ago

Generally, I try to write more formally, but then I often get complaints about being too stiff and too long. The crazy bit about blogging is that there is at least one complaint for everything you write. Just proves that you can't make everybody happy. Still, I liked it :-)

nostrademons 18y ago

From about 3/4 of the way through: "In point of fact, if this whole article is "TL;DR" then there is no way you're code is going to be "great". Just ain't happening. It may be a hell of lot of other things, most of which are destined to entertain people on WTF, but it certainly ain't ever going to be great, and probably not even good."

Hexstream 18y ago
It's not too long, it's too badly written (as exemplified by this "you're" among other things). There's none of Yegge's articles I didn't read fully once I started and I don't need to tell you how long they are. edit: I read the whole thing, it's really horrible how the bad style and orthograph makes it hard to focus on what's said. Speaking of focus, it's really ironic to get a big lecture about how important the ability to focus is coming from someone who can't even focus enough to write proper English (your/you're, their/they're, come on): "If you are finding that reading a multi-page blog essay is far too long, then you are clearly having problems focusing. [...] However, it's not all bad. If you've made it this far -- and it wasn't just blind luck in skipping text -- then it means you do have some ability to focus. It might just be a good idea to work on that a little, or possible a lot. Focus. Focus. Focus." Stylistic issues and common deformations (ya, ain't, cause) aside, here's the objective mistakes I found: "Get on with it", *you're* inner voice is screaming, adding in "just give me the *highlites*, the bullet points, the summary, dude. These things may help you if you've already had exposure, but they just ain't *the* got the knowledge in them. If you want the knowledge then *you've have* to get the knowledge, otherwise you know nothing. "Well, I don't want to waste my precious time read someone else's long rambling crud!", *you're might* be screaming by now. [...] But *its* impossible to squish all of the knowledge into summary. [...] Honestly, *you* a roving accident waiting to happen. [...] Ponder it, *its* not hard once you get used to it. If they're out there telling you otherwise, you know *their* just blowing smoke. [...] then *you're* problem is [...] then there is no way *you're* code is going to be "great" As a last point, I found him pretty unwarrantly condescending.
- phomer 18y ago
  The deformations are there on purpose, I was trying to give it an edgy style, otherwise it just doesn't appeal to the audience I am trying to reach. I fixed the other typos, as there were unintentional, just a byproduct of fast sloppy editing :-) It's writing, and it's an opinion, so I rather get it out there with a few typos, spelling mistakes and bad grammar, then just sit on it forever.
  - swombat 18y ago
    Giving it an edgy style is one thing. Giving birth to an incoherent and pointless rant is another. In this case, I'm afraid you failed and did the second one.