Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [XP] DTSTTCPW on oxymoron?

Expand Messages
  • Ian Hobson
    In article , Keith Paton writes ... No - by leaving out complexity that is needed (who says it is
    Message 1 of 30 , Jul 31 12:24 PM
      In article <00bd01bffb12$24a7c0e0$3865059a@paton>, Keith Paton
      <paton@...> writes
      >I think Mark is missing the point here.
      >Einstein was pointing out that if you express something that is not really
      >quite simple in a very simple way you miss some
      > of it; that's what the "no simpler" means.
      >
      >Put it another way; an idea has an intrinsic simplicity
      >I guess nuclear power stations are intrinsically less simple than my roller
      >blades
      >when you express the idea your expression has a simplicity also
      >
      >1
      >if the simplicity of your expression is less than the intrinsic simplicity
      >you have failed in one sense
      >(by introducing complexity of your own)
      No - by leaving out complexity that is needed (who says it is needed?)
      >
      >2
      >if the simplicity of your expression is more than the intrinsic simplicity
      >you have failed in the other sense
      >(by over-simplifying the subject)
      No - by introducing complexity that is pointless.
      >
      >3
      >if the simplicity of your expression is equal to the intrinsic simplicity
      >you have succeeded
      No. You have erred equally in both directions.

      /PENDANT OFF <G>

      The Times Law Reports, April 7th 1999, when reporting "Express & Echo
      Publications v Tanton", Court of Appeal 1999, on page 279, "[W]here a
      person... was not required to provide those services personally it... [is]
      wholly inconsistent with the contract being a contract of service... [therefore]
      the only conclusion... was that the contract was one for services."
    • Ron Jeffries
      At 09:42 PM 10/31/2000 +0100, Ilja Preuß wrote: ... Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com www.objectmentor.com
      Message 2 of 30 , Sep 9, 2000
        At 09:42 PM 10/31/2000 +0100, Ilja Preuß wrote:

        And Ron edited in <>:

        >DTSTTCPW doesn't mean "do the simplest thing that could possibly sometimes
        >work" but "try the simplest thing that could possibly work all the time;
        >if <you find>
        >it doesn't, <then> try another".


        Ron Jeffries
        www.XProgramming.com
        www.objectmentor.com
      • Joshua Kerievsky
        ... WITSTTCPW? = What Is The Simplest Thing That Could Possibly Work? Kent once mentioned that he much prefers to ask WITSTTCPW than to tell someone DTSTTCPW.
        Message 3 of 30 , Sep 29, 2000
          >DTSTTCPW doesn't mean "do the simplest thing that could possibly sometimes
          >work" but "try the simplest thing that could possibly work all the time; if
          >it doesn't, try another".

          WITSTTCPW? = What Is The Simplest Thing That Could Possibly Work?

          Kent once mentioned that he much prefers to ask WITSTTCPW than to tell someone
          DTSTTCPW. I prefer the question form too. It opens up the space for
          exploration -- hmmm, what would be most simple? DTSTTCPW is too much like a
          command, as if knowing what the "simplest thing" were easy.

          regards,
          jk
        • Chad Fowler
          A fear I have in telling *some* people to DTSTTCPW is that they will interpret it as meaning to do the most obvious first thing that comes to mind. Simple
          Message 4 of 30 , Sep 29, 2000
            A fear I have in telling *some* people to DTSTTCPW is that they will
            interpret it as meaning to do the most obvious first thing that comes
            to mind.

            Simple things aren't necessarily born of simple thoughts. They are
            often the most difficult things to arrive at.


            --- In extremeprogramming@egroups.com, Joshua Kerievsky <joshua@i...>
            wrote:
            > >DTSTTCPW doesn't mean "do the simplest thing that could possibly
            sometimes
            > >work" but "try the simplest thing that could possibly work all the
            time; if
            > >it doesn't, try another".
            >
            > WITSTTCPW? = What Is The Simplest Thing That Could Possibly Work?
            >
            > Kent once mentioned that he much prefers to ask WITSTTCPW than to
            tell someone
            > DTSTTCPW. I prefer the question form too. It opens up the space
            for
            > exploration -- hmmm, what would be most simple? DTSTTCPW is too
            much like a
            > command, as if knowing what the "simplest thing" were easy.
            >
            > regards,
            > jk
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.