Tony Mountifield wrote:
> In article <b0189c04b5d9a25bd50d4ceacf479b79.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> <m.roth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> John Hodrien wrote:
>> > On Thu, 15 Sep 2011, Always Learning wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 05:16 -0700, Craig White wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Gmagic/Imagick are somewhat incapable of doing graphing at all.
>> >>
>> >> Have you ever really looked ? What about GmagickDraw::point and
>> >> similar items ?
>> >
>> > I think the risk of the KISS approach is that you tend to reimplement
>> > everything, because everything everyone else has done is
>> > overcomplicated.
>>
>> The "danger" of KISS approach? So, you endorse complex and complicated
>> schemes? And here I thought that the True Believers in OO asserted that
>> OOP was cleaner, simpler, and easier.
>
> As Einstein said once: "Make everything as simple as possible, but not
> simpler."
>
> More to the point would be: "Judging something *solely* on its simplicity
> is an overly simplistic approach." -- Kiel Hodges. This appears to me
> to be the trap that Paul Always Learning has fallen into.
I think you don't know enough of Paul's (or my) style to suggest that he's
fallen into any trap.
And my style, for stuff that's intended to be permanent, is aimed at
elegance, not cleverness. Cleverness is defined as that 02:00 or Fri,
16:45 phone call, followed by hours of "what the hell did I do last
year?". Elegance, and KISS, is fixing the problem and going back to sleep
or leaving on time.
mark
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
