[emacs-berlin] Literate dev-ops

Murat Knecht murat.knecht at googlemail.com
Thu May 12 04:37:55 UTC 2016


just a thought on the literate programming:

> And some more basic concern: the underlying literate programming
> paradigm seems pointless WRT examples given in video. Why comments in
> natural languages should be preferable over code? Code has the purpose
> to be less ambiguous, it's a kind of math. While natural language
> gives way to interpretation, i.e. misunderstanding of all kind. Maybe
> literate programming was of interest in earlier times in a world of
> low level coding. Higher languages are adapted at human mind, let's
> use them.
Imho, LP should follow the same guidelines as code comments. If you
explain *what* you do, you should clean up your code. (Unless you're
doing advanced maths, then please explain what you do. ;) ) But often,
it's not clear *why* you're doing it at all or in this way, why you
overrode the default, why you chose this solution over another. Can I
“refactor” this code with an alternative solution — or was there a
reason for this? Some implicit dependency that I don't know about?
That's where comments are useful and absolutely necessary. For LP the
question is, if enough such situations arise to justify the inversion of
the default language (English vs bash/Python) in the file.


More information about the emacs-berlin mailing list