Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. What we say vs. what we mean

What we say vs. what we mean

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
javascriptperlcloudcsharpvisual-studio
30 Posts 14 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H honey the codewitch

    Really? Make is nasty but simple. I use it because I can't figure out CMake. They're easy to write if you can get over their use of whitespace, which i hate

    Real programmers use butterflies

    L Offline
    L Offline
    Lost User
    wrote on last edited by
    #16

    honey the codewitch wrote:

    Make is nasty

    No more so than many other products. I used it extensively in my working life, and found it had uses beyond simple software builds.

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • L Lost User

      honey the codewitch wrote:

      Make is nasty

      No more so than many other products. I used it extensively in my working life, and found it had uses beyond simple software builds.

      H Offline
      H Offline
      honey the codewitch
      wrote on last edited by
      #17

      I'm mostly referring to the syntax, and it's about as bad as perl given that it has a smaller surface area. It makes bash look positively readable by comparison.

      Real programmers use butterflies

      L 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        I always use make in Linux (and WSL), even though it means creating Makefiles by hand.

        K Offline
        K Offline
        KateAshman
        wrote on last edited by
        #18

        Me too! .. mostly because it worked well for me in 2003 and googling a makefile takes about 2 minutes, so why change?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • H honey the codewitch

          I'm mostly referring to the syntax, and it's about as bad as perl given that it has a smaller surface area. It makes bash look positively readable by comparison.

          Real programmers use butterflies

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #19

          Any syntax is 'bad' until you learn it. C, C++, Java, Smalltalk, even COBOL ...

          H 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Lost User

            Any syntax is 'bad' until you learn it. C, C++, Java, Smalltalk, even COBOL ...

            H Offline
            H Offline
            honey the codewitch
            wrote on last edited by
            #20

            I mean specifically bad as in poorly designed. Not all syntax is created equal despite your implication to the contrary. Significant whitespace is nonsense, for example, both from a parsing standpoint, and from a usability standpoint. Technically speaking it's Broken As Designed. Same with things that cannot easily be remembered by way mnemonic or anything like that. Make is littered with that. Just like code can be readable and unreadable, so can syntax. A grammar can be well designed, or it can be designed poorly. C# is an example of a well designed grammar. Make is an example of a poorly designed grammar. It is what it is.

            Real programmers use butterflies

            L 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • H honey the codewitch

              I mean specifically bad as in poorly designed. Not all syntax is created equal despite your implication to the contrary. Significant whitespace is nonsense, for example, both from a parsing standpoint, and from a usability standpoint. Technically speaking it's Broken As Designed. Same with things that cannot easily be remembered by way mnemonic or anything like that. Make is littered with that. Just like code can be readable and unreadable, so can syntax. A grammar can be well designed, or it can be designed poorly. C# is an example of a well designed grammar. Make is an example of a poorly designed grammar. It is what it is.

              Real programmers use butterflies

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #21

              honey the codewitch wrote:

              C# is an example of a well designed grammar. Make is an example of a poorly designed grammar.

              As with most things in life, it depends on your point of view.

              H 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • Sander RosselS Sander Rossel

                I'm using the joke symbol, but this is so painfully accurate it can't really be considered a joke :laugh:

                What we say

                What we mean

                Horrible hack

                Horrible hack that I didn't write

                Temporary workaround

                Horrible hack that I wrote

                It's broken

                There are bugs in your code

                It has a few issues

                There are bugs in my code

                Obscure

                Someone else's code doesn't have comments

                Self documenting

                My code doesn't have comments

                That's why it's an awesome language

                It's my favorite language and it's really easy to do something in it

                You're thinking in the wrong mindset

                It's my favorite language and it's really hard to do something in it

                I can read this Perl script

                I wrote this Perl script

                I can't read this Perl script

                I didn't write this Perl script

                Bad structure

                Someone else's code is badly organized

                Complex structure

                My code is badly organized

                Bug

                The absence of a feature I like

                Out of scope

                The absence of a feature I don't like

                Clean solution

                It works and I understand it

                We need to rewrite it

                It works but I don't understand it

                emacs is better than vi

                It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war

                vi is better than emacs

                It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war

                IMHO

                You are wrong

                Legacy code

                It works. but no one knows how

                ^X^Cquit^\[ESC][ESC]^C

                I don't know how to quit vi

                Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript

                A Offline
                A Offline
                Andrew Leeder
                wrote on last edited by
                #22

                A dear friend of mine, Richard Jones (now sadly departed), had a notice on his office wall that read "I know you think you understood what I said, but I don't think you understood that I didn't say what I meant" I have no idea where that quote came from.

                Sander RosselS M 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • L Lost User

                  honey the codewitch wrote:

                  C# is an example of a well designed grammar. Make is an example of a poorly designed grammar.

                  As with most things in life, it depends on your point of view.

                  H Offline
                  H Offline
                  honey the codewitch
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #23

                  A) Try parsing the syntax. Significant whitespace presents real technical challenges to parsers. B) Try remembering the syntax. If it can't be easily remembered, it's always going to be niche**. See also, vi. ** or replaced with something that is better.

                  Real programmers use butterflies

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • A Andrew Leeder

                    A dear friend of mine, Richard Jones (now sadly departed), had a notice on his office wall that read "I know you think you understood what I said, but I don't think you understood that I didn't say what I meant" I have no idea where that quote came from.

                    Sander RosselS Offline
                    Sander RosselS Offline
                    Sander Rossel
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #24

                    Reminds me of "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve." :laugh:

                    Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Sander RosselS Sander Rossel

                      I'm using the joke symbol, but this is so painfully accurate it can't really be considered a joke :laugh:

                      What we say

                      What we mean

                      Horrible hack

                      Horrible hack that I didn't write

                      Temporary workaround

                      Horrible hack that I wrote

                      It's broken

                      There are bugs in your code

                      It has a few issues

                      There are bugs in my code

                      Obscure

                      Someone else's code doesn't have comments

                      Self documenting

                      My code doesn't have comments

                      That's why it's an awesome language

                      It's my favorite language and it's really easy to do something in it

                      You're thinking in the wrong mindset

                      It's my favorite language and it's really hard to do something in it

                      I can read this Perl script

                      I wrote this Perl script

                      I can't read this Perl script

                      I didn't write this Perl script

                      Bad structure

                      Someone else's code is badly organized

                      Complex structure

                      My code is badly organized

                      Bug

                      The absence of a feature I like

                      Out of scope

                      The absence of a feature I don't like

                      Clean solution

                      It works and I understand it

                      We need to rewrite it

                      It works but I don't understand it

                      emacs is better than vi

                      It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war

                      vi is better than emacs

                      It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war

                      IMHO

                      You are wrong

                      Legacy code

                      It works. but no one knows how

                      ^X^Cquit^\[ESC][ESC]^C

                      I don't know how to quit vi

                      Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript

                      G Offline
                      G Offline
                      Gary Wheeler
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #25

                      How about "emacs and vi both suck, you feeble penguin-molesting twit"

                      Software Zen: delete this;

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • L Lost User

                        Thanks for the video, it came at an opportune time.

                        D Offline
                        D Offline
                        David ONeil
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #26

                        Sorry my automated systems failed - you should have a copy of the book in your inbox now. Have a great day!

                        The Science of King David's Court | Object Oriented Programming with C++

                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • D David ONeil

                          Sorry my automated systems failed - you should have a copy of the book in your inbox now. Have a great day!

                          The Science of King David's Court | Object Oriented Programming with C++

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          Lost User
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #27

                          Hi David, yes just arrived, thanks. Having watched the video, I look forward t reading the book.

                          D 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • L Lost User

                            Hi David, yes just arrived, thanks. Having watched the video, I look forward t reading the book.

                            D Offline
                            D Offline
                            David ONeil
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #28

                            I hope you enjoy the intellectual journey! Best wishes.

                            The Science of King David's Court | Object Oriented Programming with C++

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • Sander RosselS Sander Rossel

                              I'm using the joke symbol, but this is so painfully accurate it can't really be considered a joke :laugh:

                              What we say

                              What we mean

                              Horrible hack

                              Horrible hack that I didn't write

                              Temporary workaround

                              Horrible hack that I wrote

                              It's broken

                              There are bugs in your code

                              It has a few issues

                              There are bugs in my code

                              Obscure

                              Someone else's code doesn't have comments

                              Self documenting

                              My code doesn't have comments

                              That's why it's an awesome language

                              It's my favorite language and it's really easy to do something in it

                              You're thinking in the wrong mindset

                              It's my favorite language and it's really hard to do something in it

                              I can read this Perl script

                              I wrote this Perl script

                              I can't read this Perl script

                              I didn't write this Perl script

                              Bad structure

                              Someone else's code is badly organized

                              Complex structure

                              My code is badly organized

                              Bug

                              The absence of a feature I like

                              Out of scope

                              The absence of a feature I don't like

                              Clean solution

                              It works and I understand it

                              We need to rewrite it

                              It works but I don't understand it

                              emacs is better than vi

                              It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war

                              vi is better than emacs

                              It's too peaceful here, let's start a flame war

                              IMHO

                              You are wrong

                              Legacy code

                              It works. but no one knows how

                              ^X^Cquit^\[ESC][ESC]^C

                              I don't know how to quit vi

                              Best, Sander Azure DevOps Succinctly (free eBook) Azure Serverless Succinctly (free eBook) Migrating Apps to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript

                              G Offline
                              G Offline
                              Gary R Wheeler
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #29

                              In the Before Times, we talked about WYSIWYG(*) being a big deal. (*) What You See Is What You Get With the advent of artificial intelligence and machine learning, it's DWIMNWIS - Do What I Meant Not What I Said.

                              Software Zen: delete this;

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • A Andrew Leeder

                                A dear friend of mine, Richard Jones (now sadly departed), had a notice on his office wall that read "I know you think you understood what I said, but I don't think you understood that I didn't say what I meant" I have no idea where that quote came from.

                                M Offline
                                M Offline
                                Member_14192382
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #30

                                A boss of mine actually said that to me once.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                Reply
                                • Reply as topic
                                Log in to reply
                                • Oldest to Newest
                                • Newest to Oldest
                                • Most Votes


                                • Login

                                • Don't have an account? Register

                                • Login or register to search.
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                0
                                • Categories
                                • Recent
                                • Tags
                                • Popular
                                • World
                                • Users
                                • Groups