I hate VB .net

[Thinker]

Lazy programmers are not good programmers.

I can't let this go by. Never was anything further from the truth.

When it comes to the history of computer programming, from the

first programs entered in with front panel switches, to the most

advanced languages we have today, laziness is the single most

important factor in this evolution.

[Bucky]

I think Volte meant lazy in the sense of irresponsible and sloppy

in terms of code and coding standards.

 

I'd think that programmers want to try to be more efficient than

lazy, which in some cases may mean the same thing. Being

efficient means you have to do less work and get the same or

more out of it. So maybe efficient is a better adjective to describe

us, although I guess the driving force of efficiency is laziness

(most of the time). Bah, I don't know. :)

[Volte]

^ Indeed. If you can get by with something that is simpler and minimally

less functional, then go for it I say. However, if there are two methods

of doing something, one better (in terms of functionality) than the other, and you go for the

worse one simply because you're too lazy to look at the other one,

that is, I think, a bad thing.

[John]

^ Indeed. If you can get by with something that is simpler and minimally

less functional, then go for it I say. However, if there are two methods

of doing something, one better (in terms of functionality) than the other, and you go for the

worse one simply because you're too lazy to look at the other one,

that is, I think, a bad thing.

 

Well then Volte, ever looked at Assembly language? You can do with assembly anything you can do with any other language and it can be much faster and more efficent. Why don't we all write our apps in ASM then?

 

Orbity

[Volte]

Because that's usually very inefficient. Sloooooow development span

if you were developing anything major, and it would get done faster

and without much of a performance hit with C++ or VB.NET.

[John]

Because that's usually very inefficient. Sloooooow development span

if you were developing anything major, and it would get done faster

and without much of a performance hit with C++ or VB.NET.

VB.NET can compete with this example written by OnErr0r? http://www.syix.com/wpsjr1/rotatasm.zip

 

Orbity

[Thinker]

I think Volte meant lazy in the sense of irresponsible and sloppy

in terms of code and coding standards.

That isn't a definition of lazy, that is an example of how laziness

is acted out. It is like The Force. That is just the dark side.

VolteFace's original statement made no distinction between the

ways laziness can be directed, it just said flat out...

Lazy programmers are not good programmers.

I am a very lazy programmer. But that laziness is directed at the

kind of concepts that gave us OOP to begin with -- encapsulation

and reuse -- rather than toward poorer, sloppier code.

[Volte]

Making less work for yourself is not being lazy, it's being an efficient

programmer. Having broken code standards simply because you

couldn't be bothered fixing them or learning about how to fix them

is being lazy.

 

If you spend years making a machine that will do all of your house

work for you so you never have to do it again, does that make you

a lazy person? I guess in a way, and I guess that could be applied here.

So I see what you're saying, but I also stick with what I am saying.

 

Planning ahead != lazy

Taking the easy way out == lazy

 

So I guess in programming, you're kind of planning ahead so you

can take the easy way out in the future. Er.. :p I'm confusing myself.

[Bucky]

Planning ahead != lazy

Taking the easy way out == lazy

 

Using C-style syntax, are we? :D

 

I'd expect:

 

Planning ahead <> lazy

Taking the easy way out = lazy

[Volte]

Hehe, I've been C#-ing for a few days. :p