I get that the explainability of code is really important. But calling it the primary task of code is too strong, no? E.g., Twitter’s code’s primary job is to be the platform for the millions conversations that happen here. It’s only secondary that it be legible to new engineers.
-
-
-
Well… there’s no way of quantifying, so what I said can’t be straightforwardly either true or false. It’s a way of looking, and an exhortation. It is true in the sense that if you live by it, things will go better.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I've always been unconvinced by this sentiment TBH. It's a nice theory but I think it fails to explain a lot of crucial features of code. If it were primarily for other people to understand it would look very different than it does.
-
I'd love to hear your ideas about what it might look like if it *were* primarily for other people to understand! (Subject of course to computational constraints—effective in the Turing sense, correct, and adequately fast)
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
a faint echo of the languages/programs styles paradigm. it is part understanding, part mantra
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.