Re: Horrid Serial Dacs
From: Andreas Hadler (Andreas.Hadler_at_t-online.de)
Date: 09/07/04
- Next message: Kevin Aylward: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Previous message: Paul Burridge: "Re: Say Air America is still on?"
- In reply to: Jim Thompson: "Re: Horrid Serial Dacs"
- Next in thread: Ken Smith: "Re: Horrid Serial Dacs"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:11:59 +0200
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 22:50:00 +0200, Andreas Hadler
><Andreas.Hadler@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>>Always code as if the guy that ends up maintaining and/or testing you
>>code is a violant psychopath who knows exactly where you live.
>>(unknown)
>ROTFLMAO!
>
>The second one reminds me of the oldest son's admonition:
>Document/Indent/Document/Indent/Document/Indent
>
>He'd look at stuff I'd written (I quit at Pascal) and chew my ass
>every which way from Sunday ;-)
On my software face, today, I try to code for readability for "the
next guy" (which, most of the time, is me :-). To do this, satisfying
optimal execution speed / minimal memory requirements, is IMHO the
real "Art of computer programming". It was a real long way to see
software as kind of literature, and to be proud of the technical
excellence, which can be achieved along the way and is invisible most
of the time.
You can't impress someone with such code. It's understandable, and
it's working - not really an impressive achievement. You'd get a
better name and a better reputation when fighting (and winning). The
best compliments you'll get with such code are comments of coworkers
like "hey, in this 25k lines, you made an obvious mistake in module
xxx, which only took me about an hour to fix after the clients call".
Really another kind of comment than begging a software god for
assistance.
For each single case, it's economically not really the best way. You
can get more money and earn more reputation, when the customer gets
proofs for difficulties and pays for their solution. In the long run,
I lost some customers, because they didn't appreciate me as a fighting
winner, but I won much more long-time clients appreciating an
unobscured and working solution. IMHO, that's what a craftsman (and
that's what an engineer is, just on maybe a different level) is for -
delivering something working and satisfying without any hassle.
Without vanity. Without bothering the client.
Andreas
-- Every program has at least one bug and can be reduced by at least one line. By induction, then, every program can be reduced to a single instruction, and that will be wrong.
- Next message: Kevin Aylward: "Re: What does this have to do with electronics?"
- Previous message: Paul Burridge: "Re: Say Air America is still on?"
- In reply to: Jim Thompson: "Re: Horrid Serial Dacs"
- Next in thread: Ken Smith: "Re: Horrid Serial Dacs"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
