I'm really curious what language features of Python are conducive to good or easy maintenance
My guess is that "Less is More" in this situation. Python often does tend to read like pseudocode.
The problem with this, though, is that idiocy has seemingly infinite resources on its side. Occasionally, you will have an outlier who has vast holes in their understanding of programming and writes large amounts of jaw-dropping bad code and can do this even in simple elegant languages. In fact, there's one on the team I'm working with right now. (He was maneuvered onto the testing team to mitigate the damage.)
Occasionally, you will have an outlier who has vast holes in their understanding of programming and writes large amounts of jaw-dropping bad code and can do this even in simple elegant languages.
One interesting quirk of Python is that such code superficially resembles good code in everything except the length of functions and methods.
Perhaps not always a good thing. Kent Beck's preferred Smalltalk indentation style made good Smalltalk look good, and bad Smalltalk look really bad. That's actually useful.
As far as "Less is More" goes, this could be practiced in other languages by voluntarily choosing a simpler subset of features in a language with a complex feature set. Think RISC style in CISC architecture.
Comments
I'm really curious what language features of Python are conducive to good or easy maintenance
My guess is that "Less is More" in this situation. Python often does tend to read like pseudocode.
The problem with this, though, is that idiocy has seemingly infinite resources on its side. Occasionally, you will have an outlier who has vast holes in their understanding of programming and writes large amounts of jaw-dropping bad code and can do this even in simple elegant languages. In fact, there's one on the team I'm working with right now. (He was maneuvered onto the testing team to mitigate the damage.)
Occasionally, you will have an outlier who has vast holes in their understanding of programming and writes large amounts of jaw-dropping bad code and can do this even in simple elegant languages.
One interesting quirk of Python is that such code superficially resembles good code in everything except the length of functions and methods.
Perhaps not always a good thing. Kent Beck's preferred Smalltalk indentation style made good Smalltalk look good, and bad Smalltalk look really bad. That's actually useful.
Could you please elaborate?
As far as "Less is More" goes, this could be practiced in other languages by voluntarily choosing a simpler subset of features in a language with a complex feature set. Think RISC style in CISC architecture.