Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
From: Andriy Kornatskyy <andriy.kornatskyy@live.com>
To: <robert.kern@gmail.com>, "python-list@python.org" <python-list@python.org>
Subject: RE: Web Frameworks Excessive Complexity
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:17:37 +0300
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <k8ifct$hdc$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <DUB117-W665C7556168028384DCC6791550@phx.gbl>, , ,,<k8glsd$vfk$1@ger.gmane.org>, ,,<DUB117-W66187DFCFCCDBA9E2710E091550@phx.gbl>, , , <k8gnuo$iln$1@ger.gmane.org>, , <DUB117-W75B7A8A9E5A70EBD07E8B491550@phx.gbl>, , <k8gpf9$i3$1@ger.gmane.org>, <DUB117-W33017135BC75FFBDAC731C91540@phx.gbl>, <k8ifct$hdc$1@ger.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1251"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.146.1353500324.29569.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 58
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:33726


Agreed. I think we have pretty much the same point of view on this.

All these metrics advise you... this is again depends how you look at this.=
 If you are a new comer to a project=2C you usually spend some time on code=
 review=2C talk to people=2C read docs if any. The qa tools for static code=
 analysis give you an initial picture=2C how it fits with your own vision=
=2C etc. Convince or accept?

Andriy Kornatskyy


----------------------------------------
> To: python-list@python.org
> From: robert.kern@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Web Frameworks Excessive Complexity
> Date: Wed=2C 21 Nov 2012 11:54:06 +0000
>
> On 21/11/2012 11:02=2C Andriy Kornatskyy wrote:
> >
> > Robert=2C
> >
> > You would never get a better product by accident.
> >
> > The meaning of better product might differ from team to team but you ca=
n not ignore excessive complexity. Earlier or later you get back to that co=
de and refactor it=2C thus existence of such fact was driven by your intent=
ion to make it a bit better (easier to understand=2C to support=2C to cover=
 with unit tests=2C etc)=2C with a team of 20 heads you can get even furthe=
r: the whole team adherence. So those drops make the overall picture better=
. This is what you=2C as a software developer=2C donate to what the final b=
etter product become.
>
> I think you may be misinterpreting the English idiom. I don't mean that y=
our
> finger slips and randomly types out better code. I mean that by focusing =
on CC
> as a metric for improvement=2C you may very well end up improving the cod=
e=2C but
> it's not because you reduced the CC of the code. It's because of all of t=
hose
> *other* things that you talk about. Those are the things that should driv=
e your
> refactoring=2C not CC=2C because they actually do cause improved code.
>
> --
> Robert Kern
>
> "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma=2C a harmless e=
nigma
> that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it=
 had
> an underlying truth."
> -- Umberto Eco
>
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
 		 	   		  =