Short and simple functions (was: Re: Dr. Dobb's Python-URL! - weekly Python news and links (May 22))
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Tue May 23 08:36:51 CEST 2006
"Andy Salnikov" <a_salnikov at yahoo.com> writes:
> "Peter Otten" <python-url at phaseit.net> wrote in message
> news:e4sma5$msm$1 at lairds.us...
> > QOTW: "It's hard to make a mistake by having too many short and simple
> > functions. And much too easy to make them when you have too few ;-)"
> > - Thomas Bartkus
> And of course there is a mathematical proof of that provided
> somewhere, isn't it? :)
> "Too many" is always opposite to "hard to make a mistake", at least
> in my mind.
I parsed the assertion as:
(It's hard to
(make a mistake
(short and simple)
In other words, it's not that he's saying "having too many short and
simple functions" is difficult, nor that it's not a mistake; he's
saying that it's difficult to get into a situation where that is the
cause of one's mistake.
\ "I got an answering machine for my phone. Now when someone |
`\ calls me up and I'm not home, they get a recording of a busy |
_o__) signal." -- Steven Wright |
More information about the Python-list