3 ms·
"going on other" => "going on in other" (actually that sentence doesn't make sense anyways; somewhere around "were" it's gets confusing) "perseption" => "perce
by elwell 13y ago
"going on other" => "going on in other" (actually that sentence doesn't make sense anyways; somewhere around "were" it's gets confusing)
"perseption" => "perception"
"Fewer lines of code is a great thing" => [the opposite argument could easily be made as well; more lines of code (within reason) = less obfuscation]
- m0skit0 13y agoFewer lines of code doesn't necessarily mean obfuscation, this is a language feature. If Clojure is obsfuscated, then what is Perl, encrypted? On the other hand, fewer lines of code definitely mean less bug probability.
- elwell 13y agoI disagree that "fewer lines of code definitely mean less bug probability"; particularly with the word "definitely". Consider a section of six lines of code that checks several conditions for the validation of a string. Now consider a complicated regular expression that is on one line of code. I would contend the likelihood of a bug to be much greater in the latter. Yes, this does intersect with the concern of obfuscation, but I'm addressing the concern of the number of lines of code. The complicated regular expression can make certain edge cases nearly invisible, whereas the six-line conditional series lays out the problem more clearly.
- zhodge 13y ago"it's gets" => "it gets"