It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really simple

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by snorkel on Sunday October 02, 2011 @04:59PM (#3063985)

I don't understand the headline, the Python code in the article is not so terrible considering the input.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by smokinn on Sunday October 02, 2011 @05:11PM (#3064029)

His point is precisely that the input is awful.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by snorkel on Sunday October 02, 2011 @05:18PM (#3064046)

Yes, the article says the input is awful, but this headline implies the code is awful.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by hmottestad on Sunday October 02, 2011 @06:18PM (#3064220)

I was think something along the lines of, look at this stupid person who needs 64 lines of code to do a simple insert in a binary tree.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by jamesaguilar on Sunday October 02, 2011 @05:10PM (#3064025)

Can you give some brief examples of what you might do differently? Particularly, how would you solve the problem with fewer lines of code and/or complexity?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by snorkel on Sunday October 02, 2011 @05:23PM (#3064063)

I'm suggesting the Python code is not bad at all, so this headline is just confusing. Personally I'd just use regex replace to convert the data rows to CSV directly, not as thorough as the Python code.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It shouldn't take 64 lines of code to do something really... by jamesaguilar on Sunday October 02, 2011 @08:55PM (#3064559)

Oh I see. Sorry, I missed the "not".

[ Parent | on HN ]