24 ms·

The main argument appears to be that code is best dissected and understood, whereas literature is not? There's a fair number of philosophical texts which would

The main argument appears to be that code is best dissected and understood, whereas literature is not? There's a fair number of philosophical texts which would disagree. Even "simple" engineering/physics/mathematics/science books often require a deep understanding, even though they're describing something, not providing directions. It's also often important to understand the context in which a piece of literature was written, just as it is important to understand libraries and the runtime context. In other words, I think it's fine to think of code as literature, just perhaps not the same literature the author frequently reads.

Sparkyte 3y ago
you decompose literature by dissecting it so the article is moot I agree
Supermancho 3y ago
> The main argument appears to be that code is best dissected and understood, whereas literature is not? There is no reference to "best". The issue is why codebases are not read as often as developer culture has doggedly engrained that it should be. A codebase is not enjoyable as a narrative or mechanically instructive, as you have implied due to the large number of confounding factors and approaches available. Literature is primarily a form of communication, while code is primarily a means to perform. It does not fit as "useful" literature. Most of the time, reading a codebase is like reading a manual that's faded and torn and was 500 pages long (now 486). You might learn something, (fast inverse sqrt and such) but this is as incidentally useful as a pithy wisdom buried on page 322 of a VCR Manual. Nothing about why they wanted to specify 2 buttons in tandem to eject the cassette^ or why it has cooling off instructions^^. ^ The build system/factory was making a similar device that required 2 buttons so management saved some money. ^^ The rewinding mechanism tends to heat and kill the whole device for a time. The original rewinder didn't fit the case 4 weeks from production, so a primitive replacement from a vendor was used which has this problem.

Sparkyte 3y ago

you decompose literature by dissecting it so the article is moot I agree

Supermancho 3y ago

> The main argument appears to be that code is best dissected and understood, whereas literature is not? There is no reference to "best". The issue is why codebases are not read as often as developer culture has doggedly engrained that it should be. A codebase is not enjoyable as a narrative or mechanically instructive, as you have implied due to the large number of confounding factors and approaches available. Literature is primarily a form of communication, while code is primarily a means to perform. It does not fit as "useful" literature. Most of the time, reading a codebase is like reading a manual that's faded and torn and was 500 pages long (now 486). You might learn something, (fast inverse sqrt and such) but this is as incidentally useful as a pithy wisdom buried on page 322 of a VCR Manual. Nothing about why they wanted to specify 2 buttons in tandem to eject the cassette^ or why it has cooling off instructions^^. ^ The build system/factory was making a similar device that required 2 buttons so management saved some money. ^^ The rewinding mechanism tends to heat and kill the whole device for a time. The original rewinder didn't fit the case 4 weeks from production, so a primitive replacement from a vendor was used which has this problem.