Re: What does "lacks a prefix" mean?

[Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se>]

Yuri Khan <yuri.v.khan@gmail.com> writes:

>> If you are to muck around with old code, which
>> seldom is a good idea but sometimes necessary (?),
>
> Why the (?)? Mucking around with old code is
> necessary every time you want to add a feature or
> debug a failure.

It depends what you mean. Adding a particular feature
or fixing a particular bug is one thing. The
"let* style" simplifies this.

Another thing altogether is "refactoring code",
"optimizing", etc. *in general*. That is a bad idea
and a bad entry point. If the program is poorly
written, why not re-write it from scratch? OTOH, if
the program is written in a good style, there is no
reason to do any overall changes. There are very
likely improvements to be made, and bugs to fix, and
again, using let* makes this easy work because
everything is clearly organized and you can easily
spot the part you need to change/fix.

> You’re putting out a strawman by comparing a “let*
> style” where small expressions are given names and
> arranged in a total order with a “let style” where
> few names are bound to independent but
> huge expressions.
>
> The ultimate degree of the “let*” style you describe
> is code compiled to assembly. (For the sake of
> argument

There is always an extreme example that will make the
most sound attitude bizarre. It is a dead end to argue
like that.

> Schoolbook stuff? No, we were not taught about
> dependencies at school. We were taught recipes.

I was taught, or "told" I should say, a lot about
dependencies at school, and I read about them in many
textbooks. There are many systems how to properly draw
them with boxes and arrows. I believed then, and now,
that this made-up, good-for-nothing "science" is
a very sad routine, rather than comical, and to me it
is a mystery that people do it. 99% of my school time
wasn't like that, so it is fine, but yeah, I get angry
just by thinking about that pompous BS that takes the
fun and creativity out of everything, being told to
kids that are ten or twenty times the hackers as the
teachers "spreading the word". It is a very sad state.

> Maybe you can keep 15 named variables and 60 unnamed
> intermediate values in your head and reason about
> them freely.

... what? *I'm* the one who want stuff named!

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573