Anonymous user
Talk:Pseudo-random numbers/PCG32: Difference between revisions
→The Pseudocode: Un-idiomatic.
m (→The Pseudocode) |
(→The Pseudocode: Un-idiomatic.) |
||
Line 41:
:::::: I have noticed, for example, that there are those who seem more or less convinced by run-time speed as a proxy for quality (even to the point of spending long and happy weekends building stripped-down drag-racer languages :-) My own approach is a bit less exciting – I value productivity and reliability, to the point of feeling more than a little ashamed if I waste any time all in optimising prematurely, or even slightly more than is required for the task in hand.
:::::: Different people understand, and value, different things. Functional composition does require a few more concepts than the Sequence, Branch, and Loop-Mutate of the other religion, but those few extra concepts are all well rewarded – not least in more productivity and much less debugging :-) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 00:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Your personal style is not idiomatic Python. It is longer and less intelligible by the Python community, in fact, rejected by the community and the then BDFL, as well as not coming up for reconsideration. Idiomatic functional Python is not what you write. As you avoid stating. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 03:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
| |||