User talk:Hout: Difference between revisions
→The only comment which provides constrastive insight is an alternative draft.
Line 11:
--[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 09:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
You don't have the standing to make those judgements. The only interesting comments about compliance with standards are made by the widely-used linters. Linters are '''frequently''' somewhat unflattering about your own imperative code, but I make no comment.
The only interesting and instructive Rosetta comment is an alternative draft. If you prefer a different style of functional Python, just contribute a better draft – we will all learn and benefit, and I, for one, look forward to that.
The goal of Rosetta code is to provide contrastive insight. Parading poorly-linted but allegedly regimental uniform on frequently unreliable and weakly-conceived code, while shrilly declaring yourself to be a higher authority than the tooling – well, if that provides contrastive insight, then I'm not sure that it is insight into computational issues. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 10:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
| |||