Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practices” (2014)

Re:Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practi... by joesb on Monday August 29, 2016 @03:08AM (#12380486)

So which rule take precedents here? Namespace is obviously not flat, at least it's more nested than one without namespace.

That's the problem I have with people praising Zen of Python as if it means anything. It's like a bible you just pick the verse you like to justify your action even if it might conflict with other rules. Then you praise the whole thing for being so wise.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practi... by qwertyuiop924 on Monday August 29, 2016 @07:03AM (#12381128)

It means a lot: good python code follows it. However, yes, some of the verses conflict, because it turns out that good advice sometimes contradicts itself. All I can say is don't go too far in either direction.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practi... by LyndsySimon on Monday August 29, 2016 @12:11PM (#12382869)

Much of the point of the Zen of Python is that it's self-contradictory.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practi... by eximius on Friday September 02, 2016 @02:33AM (#12411271)

Balanced, you must be.

[ Parent | on HN ]