Re:The Value in Go’s Simplicity
by teunispeters on Saturday November 16, 2019 @01:50PM
(#21554235)
aesthetics are relative, not absolute.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Value in Go’s Simplicity
by BurningFrog on Saturday November 16, 2019 @03:08PM
(#21554640)
Readability to me is about clarity, not aesthetics.
How easily can people understand what this code does and how?
This is at least conceptually objectively measurable, though I don't know of any actual attempts to do so.
Re:The Value in Go’s Simplicity
by teunispeters on Sunday November 17, 2019 @03:42AM
(#21557103)
That's important. But why I say relative - is because the structure and language of readability is dependent on the code culture one is working within, not an outside measure.
That's why things like C coding style is so variable - sometimes within the same body of code (see net-snmp ....)
I'd rather have consistent coding standards but I daily deal with different team projects with different conventions, so I'm used to adapting my own reading conventions as I switch contexts.
Keep a common aesthetic within a project. It's worth it - by measure of success of a project.
Re:The Value in Go’s Simplicity
by BurningFrog on Sunday November 17, 2019 @05:07PM
(#21560339)
This might be bad for maintaining a lively argument in this thread, but I fully agree with that.