Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Robert Klemme Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Holy boop: goto for Java Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 23:24:19 +0200 Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <6AVyr.1859$8l2.827@newsfe14.iad> <77a353f2-0933-413a-8e47-df577ba64976@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net r5f2oROvgebz2XKncczCogbuo37F4pem8vGYDCoXW48p0YovlcxF32k372TiVU/iI= Cancel-Lock: sha1:r4H/DblO/MqO1fzne54V4YGA1Oo= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:15080 On 05.06.2012 18:15, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 07:31:44 +0200, Robert Klemme > wrote: > Which is often us so being nice to the maintenance programmer is > being nice to oneself. That's a nice side effect - and a motivating argument which helps the selfish. :-) > Besides the story paradigm, I also think in terms of program > usefulness. If a program is not very useful, one can write it pretty > much any way one wants as the program is going to get tossed anyway. > If it is useful, then it is going to stick around, and requirements > have a way of changing so the program had better be maintainable. It > can also be difficult to tell whether a program will be useful so why > not just write them all clearly? I suspect often the answer to that question is: because the author did not understand the problem or the program or programming itself clearly. The other big reason is carelessness, often increased by tight schedules. Deadlines seem to make people nervous and trying to take short circuits. But it will cost - sooner or later. Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/