Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:31:04 -0800 |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Comments: |
|
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
The more cryptic it is, the more miraculous it looks. Which is not to say
that C programmers should be equated with God just because C lends itself to
being cryptic unless the programmer thoughtfully adds some white space and
comment lines.
I didn't read all the Church& State OT's but somehow we seem to still be
hanging precariously onto the "subject".
Bruce wrote:
> (This is clearly the expectation of a miracle, a totally
> unexplained and
> capricious event in the Universe.)
<snip>
...
<snip>
> I don't know what compiler Wirt is using, but my programs contain
> miraculous code surprisingly often. Moreover, such miracles are not
> necessarily produced by some sort of anti-God; many are surprisingly
> benevolent. Is there *any* experienced programmer who has
> not, upon going
> back to maintain some old code, once said to him/herself, "What was I
> thinking? It's a miracle that this code ever worked at all!"
> Programmers
> rely on the miraculous far more often than Wirt suggests.
|
|
|