in 117455 20090615 044816 Steven D'Aprano <ste...@remove.this.cybersource.com.au> wrote: >On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:39:50 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >>> Shame on you for deliberately cutting out my more serious and nuanced >>> answer while leaving a silly quip. >> >> Can't have been very "serious and nuanced" if it could be summed up by >> such a "silly quip" though, could it? > >But it can't be summed up by the silly quip, which is why I'm complaining >that the silly quip on its own fails to include the more serious and >nuanced elements of my post.
Lots of references to "good programmer" but no attempt to define the term. Who is the better programmer - one who writes lousy code but produces good programs or one who obeys all the rules of coding but whose programs break all the time? (Yes, I know there are two other categories!) In almost 50 years programming I have met all types but I tended to judge them by the end results, not on their style. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
