Python is readable
Albert van der Horst
albert at spenarnc.xs4all.nl
Thu Mar 29 15:44:25 CEST 2012
In article <mailman.896.1332440814.3037.python-list at python.org>,
Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice at gmail.com> wrote:
>I read that article a long time ago, it was bullshit then, it is
>bullshit now. The only thing he gets right is that the Shannon
>information of a uniquely specified program is proportional to the
>code that would be required to generate it. Never mind that if a
Thank you for drawing my attention to that article.
It attacks the humbug software architects.
Are you one of them?
I really liked that article.
>program meets a specification, you shouldn't care about any of the
>values used for unspecified parts of the program. If you care about
>the values, they should be specified. So, if Joel had said that the
>program was uniquely specified, or that none of the things that
>weren't specified require values in the programming language, he might
>have been kinda, sorta right. Of course, nobody cares enough to
>specify every last bit of minutiae in a program, and specifications
>change, so it is pretty much impossible to imagine either case ever
I wonder if you're not talking about a different article.
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert at spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
More information about the Python-list