why no "do : until"?

[Steve Lamb]

On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 23:41:14 -0500, Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> wrote:
>You are a cowboy-hacker type of programmer, not one working as a serious
>software engineer in a group environment, right?  Or, if the latter, your
>management just hasn't caught on yet.

    Actually, the latter and management has caught on.  They like the work I
do.  That is because I don't spend days worrying about doing it one way or
another when the difference is so miniscule that it isn't worth worrying over.
 
    Like I said, how often is the code going to be changed versus getting the
work done.  Idealism is fine and dandy as long as it doesn't get in the way of
getting work done.  I'm firmly on the bazaar side, not the cathedral.  There
is nothing wrong with that simple construct.  Nothing.  Only to those who do
spend 3 days worrying about it instead of moving on to the next few hundreds
of lines is there something wrong.  

    "Well, concpetually the variable means two things, blah, blah, blah, yap,
yap, yap, yadda, yadda, yadda, yank, yank, yank."  I think my favorite was
that one shouldn't init variables to arbitrary values.  I laughed a good few
minutes for that one.  Should one init variables only to /random/ values?
That's the whole point of initing a variable, to set to to a known, arbitrary,
value.

    It is like the people who are complaining about a valid while 1:break loop
because it isn't obvious to the newbie maintainer.  Do you want a newbie
maintaining your code in the first place?  No.  Do you want someone who is
more worried about perfection in the code than working code?  No.

    Am I a "cowboy-hacker type of programmer?"  Better than either of the two
extremes, so... yes.  

-- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------