From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Ell Subject: Re: Software landmines (loops) Date: 1998/09/12 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 390398336 References: <35DBDD24.D003404D@calfp.co.uk> <904556531.666222@miso.it.uq.edu.au> <6sgror$je8$3@news.indigo.ie> <6sh3qn$9p2$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6simjo$jnh$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sjk3p$4tc$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6skgn4$3gq$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sm6md$3fh$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35f1375e.6237208@news.erols.com> <35F74AEC.21982C2B@oma.com> <6t937n$ep6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@digex.net X-Trace: newsreader.digex.net 905600439 205.197.245.192 (Sat, 12 Sep 1998 07:40:39 EDT) Organization: The Universe User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980226 (UNIX) (SunOS/4.1.4 (sun4m)) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 07:40:39 EDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-09-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In comp.object dewarr@my-dejanews.com wrote: : : Tim Ottinger wrote: :> :> Ell wrote: :> > :> > But generally it is possible to get a plurality or majority to :> > agree on what is readable. :> what on earth makes you think that? Because I see it happening in all kinds of callective decision making groups. For goodness sake you don't? The bowling team, co-workers headed out to blow steam off on Friday, church groups, tour groups, band members, mob groups, etc, etc. People frequently able to reach majority decisions and if not there's almost always a plurality for one position or another. You all's view that we can know little to nothing for sure, and that one view is as good as another is so hackerish. It's such an on the knees appeal to accept unbridled and in many cases extremely harmful individulism. :> > In most cases readability decisions are made by :> > polling project developers where I work and have worked in the past. :> > You have to go with something, why not the plurality, or majority? :> :> This is in direct opposition to your anti-pragmatism post which :> I read earlier this evening. How? The pragmatist position is the super individualistic one. :> For that matter, why not join the majority of people :> who believe se/se is the basis of SP? What majority? Where? Most on comp.object seem to think it means navigating with discipline - using procedure calls to "meld" multiple returns into a single one. I.e. avoiding one way, non-round trip navigation, entering a block of code from the start. : For me, the reason it makes sense to simply take majority : votes on style issues is that consistency is THE most : important issue, much more important than the actual : decisions (it's like driving, it really doesn't matter if : you drive on the left or right, but it is really important : to agree Wrong headed pragmatism, pure and simple. It's ludicrous on the face of it to say all that matters is making a decision, not the content of the decision itself. That's like saying it's more important that we all decided to poison ourselves, rather than questioning the whole decision. -- this observation thanks to Tarski :-) I'm not surprised. I would be ashamed of this not happy. Elliott -- :=***=: Objective * Pre-code Modelling * Holistic :=***=: Hallmarks of the best SW Engineering "The domain object model is the foundation of OOD." Check out SW Modeller vs SW Craftite Central : www.access.digex.net/~ell Copyright 1998 Elliott. exclusive of others' writing. may be copied without permission only in the comp.* usenet and bitnet groups.