Applying the Linus Torvalds “Good Taste” Coding Requirement

Re:Applying the Linus Torvalds “Good Taste” Coding Requirement by colanderman on Wednesday October 26, 2016 @11:14AM (#12797089)

Taste is malleable and relative. One can even entertain different notions of taste. I personally have at least two – "understandable" and "performant" – and they aren't always (but sometimes are) exclusive of each other.

I suspect Linus's "taste", given Linux's problem domain, tuned to some combination of performant + testable + reviewable + portable. In the example given, Linus's rewrite meets these requirements; hence his assertion that it is in better taste.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Applying the Linus Torvalds “Good Taste” Coding Requirement by ant6n on Wednesday October 26, 2016 @11:40AM (#12797359)

I feel at this point, the notion of 'good taste' has become even more ill-defined, something very personal. Then the notion is not very useful as a coding guideline.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Applying the Linus Torvalds “Good Taste” Coding Requirement by aero142 on Wednesday October 26, 2016 @12:25PM (#12797809)

There isn't a domain where taste isn't personal. It's always a blend of art and science. Just because you can't define it exactly though, doesn't mean you can't get closer to it by working at it.

[ Parent | on HN ]