On 8/4/2015 8:19 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> Don't beat about the bush, Clipka. Tell him what you really think. ;-)
>
> Don't worry, I already got that from this guy:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/21/financial_software_disasters/?page=2
>
>

Thanks for the link. I enjoyed reading it because it confirms my 
prejudices. :)

> “They think that if they’re not writing 80 lines of code to add two numbers,
they’re not using their education.”

How true that one is.
In SAP there is a trend for programmers to move into configuration. 
Their implementations are all about writing bespoke code to do what can 
be done with half an hour's training or a small change in methodology.
Nightmare!

> "And one language I’ve been warned about, though I’ve never had the
> opportunity to use it, is Haskell, an offshoot of ML. According to a
> friend in academia who’s studied it, it’s “the Taliban version of ML,”
> in which it’s all but impossible to write readable code."
>
> Yes, because if you read the linked Stack Overflow question, you'll see
> how this function is actually "x = 1 : map (*2)", followed by no less
> than 15 steps of deliberate obfuscation.
>
> In other words "I looked up the most unnecessarily complex piece of code
> I could find in language XYZ, thereby proving that it's impossible to
> write readable code in language XYZ".
>

Well, what do you expect when someone wants to make a point? ;-)

> Jesus, just because a language requires you to *use your brain* and
> learn to *think differently* does not mean it is "impossible to write
> readable code with it". >:-[

Do you think that this is because that using your brain is a threat to 
your management?

Remember (no it is too long ago to actually remember) education for the 
working class and slaves. Was considered a bad thing for the ruling 
classes. It gave the lower orders ideas above their station.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message