For all things, for all men, that a man compliments a thing does not imply that this man at least attempts to understand this thing. However, for all men, that a man criticises a thing implies that this man at least attempts to understand this thing.

For all computer programs, that a computer program is terrible implies that scrapping the current implementation of this computer program and beginning anew may be the best method of fixing this computer program.

With few exceptions, for all programming languages $l$, given sufficient effort, $l$ source code can be human-readable.

The UNIX philosophy never became outdated.

For all computer programs $p$, $p$ should be written sufficiently well that the author of $p$ can be prideful of $p$.

For all computer programs $p$, a specification for $p$ should be written before $p$ is created.

For all good computer programs, a good computer program can run on terrible hardware.

Every clock cycle is valuable.

  • 5
    One could criticise the first paragraph for not including women without attempting to understand it. That invalidates the whole idea.
  • 4
    Disagree that a spec should be created before a program in all cases. Might have been sensible back in the day, but not now.

    Clock cycles are not more valuable than my time.
  • 0
    @AlmondSauce: The creation of specifications facilitates re-writing programs when programs are written poorly, as well as ensuring that the program functions as intended.

    For all programs, that a program is used by millions of men implies that the performance of this program should be maximised. Some companies, e.g., Google, have failed to maximise the performance of computer programs.
  • 1
    @electrineer: "Man" is used as a gender-neutral term.
  • 1
    @varikvalefor it's interesting that the meaning of the word has changed from gender neutral to usually meaning an adult male. But it doesn't matter which way you meant it: my point remains either way.
  • 2
    Am I just retarded. I can't make sense of first two paras grammatically. It just fucks with me so hard.
  • 1
    @3rdWorldPoison it's not easy reading but it's not fucked up either. You need to concentrate a little to understand it.

    It says that you can compliment anything you don't understand, but to critique something, you must at least try to understand it.

    You critiquing it for being hard to understand means that you tried to read it.
  • 0
Add Comment