> Im tired of it. Its not effecient. Its bad and you should feel bad.
You're ignoring that sometimes, measurably more efficient code is less readable, possibly much less readable. If this weren't the case, there'd be no such thing as sophisticated data-structures and algorithms.
This doesn't mean anyone should make an uncommented ball of mud with no comments, of course.
> No, lets double down on our delusions of superiority by telling ourselves that crap we wrote is somehow effecient in some way.
The usual wisdom about efficient code, answers this: if you aren't measuring performance, that means you don't really care about performance.
If you're going to great efforts, and writing less readable code, on the hunch that this is more efficient, then sure, you're doing it wrong.
> Im tired of it. Its not effecient. Its bad and you should feel bad.
You're ignoring that sometimes, measurably more efficient code is less readable, possibly much less readable. If this weren't the case, there'd be no such thing as sophisticated data-structures and algorithms.
This doesn't mean anyone should make an uncommented ball of mud with no comments, of course.
> No, lets double down on our delusions of superiority by telling ourselves that crap we wrote is somehow effecient in some way.
The usual wisdom about efficient code, answers this: if you aren't measuring performance, that means you don't really care about performance.
If you're going to great efforts, and writing less readable code, on the hunch that this is more efficient, then sure, you're doing it wrong.