On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 16:52 -0400, Paul M Foster wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:28:13PM -0400, tedd wrote: > > > At 5:06 PM -0400 4/13/10, Robert Cummings wrote: > >> Nathan Rixham wrote: > >>> > >>> well that's one job I'm not getting :p > >> > >> Well you DID get 66.7%. I've met "coders" that would stare at the > >> answer and still not understand :D > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Rob. > > > > Well.. count me among those staring. I just don't get those type of > > things until I see them actually work. > > > > My "logic" works the other way -- when presented with a logic > > problem, I come up with a solution that works the way I think and I > > always to solve the problem presented. Perhaps my solution isn't as > > clever nor as cryptic as others, but it's always easier to read and > > understand. > > +1 > > I've never had other coders looking over my shoulder, and I agonized for > years over whether my logical solutions were the "best" approach. Now I > just code and take pride in the fact that I can understand what I did > later (mostly). > > Paul > > -- > Paul M. Foster > I think as long as the code is readable, and doesn't have any glaringly obvious issues (I've seen people re-writing built in PHP functionality because they didn't know the built-in function existed) then it should be OK. Add comments to aid any areas where you think you might forget or other people might not easily understand what is happening. Don't get me wrong, clever ideas are nice, and sometimes with the right comment they just work beautifully. Just occassionally though something is done in such a neat clever way, that in the future when it comes time to extend the system, this neat clever idea is actually a hindrance and causes extra work because it has to be re-written a 'less-clever' but more flexible way! Thanks, Ash http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
