Re: "Good" Programming

You are bringing up an ancient topic in programming, is programming
an art or a science?  There are arguments for both.  

I believe, both.

Regards,

Jim Langston

Mike Naughton wrote:
> 
> RPG400-L@midrange.com writes:
> >Standards do not readable code make either. No, the only thing that
> >makes readable code is a good programmer making good choices.
> 
> I agree, but this raises an interesting question (to me, anyway!). Does
> this mean, in the end, that no set of rules ("never use GO TOs", "always
> indent IF loops", "use these standards") will by themselves ensure "good"
> programming (i.e. readable, easily maintainable code)? If so, does this
> imply that "good" programming is an art, not a science, and there are no
> such things as "software engineers" -- only "software artists"? Sometimes
> when I've been deep in the middle of a project, I've found myself thinking
> of the code as having a sort of shape, and my job is to make that shape as
> efficient (and "elegant") as possible -- it becomes, in some sense a
> "sculpture in logic".
> 
> Different languages lend themselves more easily to certain shapes,
> although there are basic constructions which are found in many
> environments. . . .
> 
> Just a thought -- hope this isn't too far off-topic!
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---