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

Re: [PBML] Faith restored..

Expand Messages
  • Peter Dominey
    While not a Perl guru, hence my subscription to this group, I have to concur with your thoughts. I too have very strong suspicion that so much of the code
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      While not a Perl guru, hence my subscription to this group, I have to
      concur with your thoughts.

      I too have very strong suspicion that so much of the code today is buggy
      and error prone because there is no strong desire or requirement to
      produce clean, efficient, tight code. I find great irony in the ever
      larger (memory, DASD etc) & more powerful systems, that provide little
      or no reduction in processing time. Hand in glove with that seems to be
      the equal tendency to produce interactive solutions to problems that
      were previously done as part of a batch or command line process. So that
      now when one describes a solution to a problem that requires the use of
      existing commands and some wrapper code it's assumed to not be a
      'proper' solution because it doesn't involve a whole re-write or a
      completely new application.

      I too don't mean this t be a rant of any sort, just an expression of
      views, and hopefully the encouragement of 'older' coding practices.

      Thanks

      Peter


      On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 15:49 -0600, fkleinbu@... wrote:
      > Recently I posted a question to the list asking for another way to write
      > some
      > code, tighter than the solution I had posted.. The replies I initially received
      >
      > were very troubling.. Basically I was told why worry about it?? I know these
      >
      > days, RAM is cheap, and with terabyte disc drives on the market, so is disk
      >
      > space, who cares about a few more bytes in your code.. I was really
      > disappointed in the replies and even talked about them to a non-computer
      >
      > literate friend yesterday evening..
      >
      > Well I guess I am just an old throw back; one who believes ?it can always
      > be
      > written in less lines?.. When I was learning to code, admittedly many years
      >
      > ago, the programs we provided were naturally graded for functionality, but
      >
      > also, and just as import, they were graded for elegance and simplicity..
      >
      >
      > Perhaps one of the reasons code these days code is so buggy is because more
      > people don?t feel as I do.. To many folks just want to get it done and care
      >
      > less how elegant the resulting code looks.. Coding is nothing like writing..
      >
      > In writing we do much more than give instructions.. We carefully choose
      > our
      > works to elicit a particular response or draw a picture in the readers mind?s
      >
      > eye.. A CPU cannot get the joy of an irony, or enjoy a nice simile.. \
      >
      > Rant mode off
      >
      > I do admit I was very happy to know someone else is more willing to help,
      > rather
      > than to try and convince me it isn?t important.. And the beauty of it, the
      >
      > answer as even simpler than what I had conceived.. flk k
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Unsubscribing info is here: http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/groups-32.html
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ----------------------------------------
      > Scanned for Viruses! mail.dominey.biz
      >
      > ----------------------------------------
      > Scanned for Viruses! mail.dominey.biz
      --

      +----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
      | P J Dominey |
      | Independent UNIX Contractor |
      | |
      | E-Mail: peter@... |
      | Web Site: www.pdrinformationsolutions.com (www.pdris.com) |
      | |
      | Tel: 817-488-5957 |
      | Cell: 972-489-6749 Yahoo IM: pdominey |
      | AOL IM: peterdominey |
      +----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

      ----------------------------------------
      Scanned for Viruses! mail.dominey.biz

      ----------------------------------------
      Scanned for Viruses! mail.dominey.biz
    • merlyn@stonehenge.com
      ... Peter I too have very strong suspicion that so much of the code today is buggy Peter and error prone because there is no strong desire or requirement to
      Message 2 of 5 , Feb 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        >>>>> "Peter" == Peter Dominey <pdominey@...> writes:

        Peter> I too have very strong suspicion that so much of the code today is buggy
        Peter> and error prone because there is no strong desire or requirement to
        Peter> produce clean, efficient, tight code. I find great irony in the ever
        Peter> larger (memory, DASD etc) & more powerful systems, that provide little
        Peter> or no reduction in processing time. Hand in glove with that seems to be
        Peter> the equal tendency to produce interactive solutions to problems that
        Peter> were previously done as part of a batch or command line process. So that
        Peter> now when one describes a solution to a problem that requires the use of
        Peter> existing commands and some wrapper code it's assumed to not be a
        Peter> 'proper' solution because it doesn't involve a whole re-write or a
        Peter> completely new application.

        I still rant when someone uses a useless use of cat (described
        at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useless_use_of_cat). And the response
        I get now is "so what, it's clearer to me, and CPU is cheap". Kids.
        Get off my lawn. And turn that music down.

        :-)

        --
        Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
        <merlyn@...> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
        Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
        See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
      • fkleinbu@lazy-kay.com
        ... Then you will be quite happy to know I have broken my very bad habbit of using: cat |grep .. It was just the way the instructor showed
        Message 3 of 5 , Feb 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          >From: merlyn@...
          >Date: 01 Feb 2006 07:36:15 -0800
          >
          >I still rant when someone uses a useless use of cat (described
          >at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useless_use_of_cat). And the response
          >I get now is "so what, it's clearer to me, and CPU is cheap". Kids.
          >Get off my lawn. And turn that music down.
          >
          >:-)

          Then you will be quite happy to know I have broken my very bad habbit
          of using:

          cat <some filename>|grep <args>..

          It was just the way the instructor showed us (back in '84) and I've
          stuck with it until most recently.. And sorry, though approaching 2
          score and 10, I still like my music up real loud <grin>.. flk k
        • fkleinbu@lazy-kay.com
          ... I ve been told a guru is one who knows 10% more than the person asking the question .. ... [snip] I was recently tasked to re-write a shell script
          Message 4 of 5 , Feb 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            >From: Peter Dominey <pdominey@...>
            >Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:29:09 -0600
            >
            >
            >While not a Perl guru, hence my subscription to this group, I have to
            >concur with your thoughts.
            >
            I've been told a guru is one who knows 10% more than the person asking
            the question <grin>..
            >
            >I too have very strong suspicion that so much of the code today is buggy
            >and error prone because there is no strong desire or requirement to
            >produce clean, efficient, tight code.
            [snip]

            I was recently tasked to re-write a shell script file monitor in perl..
            Reading the shell script, I came to the point in which the code determined
            the file name, and then performed a read of the directory, loading in each
            occurance of the file name into an array, then looping though the array,
            calculating how many file names were returned, and then added some logic
            to
            get the correct file..

            While the code to do this was fairly nice and compact, the way the filename
            was constructed, there could never be more than a single file name returned..

            The whole section could have been done with a "if ( -e <filename> )".. I
            was
            in disbelief..

            flk k
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.