On Apr 19, 10:12�am, Scott David Daniels
wrote:
> Hendrik van Rooyen wrote:
> > "Mensanator" wrote:
>
> > 8< -- description of bugs in spaghetti ---
>
> > Looks like that design really needed sorting out!
>
> >> A programmer once said to me "Why should I run it, I know
> >> ho
On Apr 19, 3:51�am, "Hendrik van Rooyen" wrote:
> "Mensanator" wrote:
>
> 8< -- description of bugs in spaghetti ---
>
> Looks like that design really needed sorting out!
Since I was translating to Pascal, I couldn't
emulate that code if I wanted to.
>
> >A programmer once s
Hendrik van Rooyen wrote:
"Mensanator" wrote:
8< -- description of bugs in spaghetti ---
Looks like that design really needed sorting out!
A programmer once said to me "Why should I run it, I know
how it works, I wrote it."
Are you serious?
In my opinion, anybody who s
On Apr 19, 3:05 am, "Hendrik van Rooyen" wrote:
> "Aaron Brady" wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 4:44 am, "Hendrik van Rooyen" wrote:
>
> >> to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if
> >> the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which
> >> IMO is the only rational test for the qua
"Mensanator" wrote:
8< -- description of bugs in spaghetti ---
Looks like that design really needed sorting out!
>A programmer once said to me "Why should I run it, I know
>how it works, I wrote it."
Are you serious?
In my opinion, anybody who says this is not a programmer
"BJörn Lindqvist" wrote:
>I can somewhat sympathise with the op, neither python nor any other
>mainstream language can still do this:
>
>SCREEN 13
>PSET 160,100,255
Oh come on! Don't be like that!
Tell us what it does, please.
- Hendrik
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
"Aaron Brady" wrote:
On Apr 18, 4:44 am, "Hendrik van Rooyen" wrote:
>> to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if
>> the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which
>> IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece
>
>I don't use 'rational' in the same way.
"Steven D'Aprano" wrote:
COMEFROM on the other hand is just the purest evil imaginable.
*grin* - I expect you say this because it is a bit like COBOL's
alter - you cannot *see* it in place when you read the code, and
the effect is only apparent at run time after the distant statement
has been
On Apr 18, 4:44 am, "Hendrik van Rooyen" wrote:
> "baykus" wrote:
> > I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking
> > for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be
> > better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and
> > Basic is
On Apr 18, 2009, at 5:44 , Hendrik van Rooyen wrote:
"baykus" wrote:
I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking
for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic
would be
better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and
Basic is Basi
On Apr 18, 4:44 am, "Hendrik van Rooyen" wrote:
> "baykus" wrote:
> > I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking
> > for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be
> > better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and
> > Basic is
"baykus" wrote:
> I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking
> for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be
> better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and
> Basic is Basic. I am not comparing them at all. I understand the
12 matches
Mail list logo
