" (I'm not sure if this phrase
is in the book, I plucked it from any number of poor college textbooks).

~~~
fermigier
You probably misread the intent of the book editors and writers. As @debo_
wrote above: "Code golf was strictly discouraged throughout the review
process. When authors were faced with implementing functionality poorly to fit
more in, we generally cut scope instead."

------
exabrial
How about a competition to see who can write the clearest code for the next
guy, in minimal lines of code?

~~~
voltagex_
Sometimes optimising for the least lines of code leads to _less_ clarity than
being a bit more verbose and explaining yourself better.

I still haven't quite worked out the code vs comments ratio.

~~~
exabrial
Couldn't agree more.

------
archos1
*500 Lines or Fewer

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less)

~~~
arsenerei
From your reference.

> However, descriptive grammarians (who describe language as actually used)
> point out that this rule does not correctly describe the most common usage
> of today or the past and in fact arose as an incorrect generalization of a
> personal preference expressed by a grammarian in 1770.

> Many supermarket checkout line signs, for instance, will read "10 items or
> less"; others, however, will use fewer in an attempt to conform to what is
> incorrectly perceived as required by the prescription although this is in
> fact a clear case of hypercorrection as explained in Pocket Fowler’s Modern
> English Usage.

> Less has always been used in English with counting nouns. Indeed, the
> application of the distinction between less and fewer as a rule is a
> phenomenon originating in the 18th century.

------
genos
Looks like there's code in different languages, so the arbitrary 500 line
count gets even more hazy. As an extreme case, consider 500 lines of APL vs.
Java.

------
nine_k
500 lines of _what?_ 500 lines of APL / J / Q is enormous; 500 lines of
Haskell / Scala / Ruby
" (I'm not sure if this phrase 
 is in the book, I plucked it from any numeral of hapless college textbooks). 

 ~~~ 
 fermigier 
 You probably misread the intent of the script editors and writers. As @debo _ 
 write above: " Code golf was strictly discouraged throughout the reappraisal 
 process. When authors were front with implementing functionality poorly to fit 
 more in, we generally cut scope alternatively. " 

 ------ 
 exabrial 
 How about a competition to see who can write the clear code for the next 
 guy, in minimal lines of code? 

 ~~~ 
 voltagex _ 
 Sometimes optimising for the least lineage of code leads to _ less _ clarity than 
 being a bit more verbose and explaining yourself well. 

 I still haven't quite worked out the code vs comments ratio. 

 ~~~ 
 exabrial 
 Couldn't agree more. 

 ------ 
 archos1 
 * 500 line or Fewer 

 [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less) 

 ~~~ 
 arsenerei 
 From your reference. 

 > However, descriptive grammarians (who describe language as actually used) 
 > point out that this rule does not correctly describe the most coarse usage 
 > of today or the past and in fact arose as an faulty abstraction of a 
 > personal predilection expressed by a grammarian in 1770. 

 > Many supermarket checkout line signs, for instance, will read " 10 items or 
 > less "; others, however, will use few in an attempt to conform to what is 
 > incorrectly perceived as required by the prescription although this is in 
 > fact a clear case of hypercorrection as explained in Pocket Fowler ’s Modern 
 > English Usage. 

 > Less has always been used in English with counting noun. Indeed, the 
 > application of the differentiation between less and fewer as a rule is a 
 > phenomenon originating in the 18th century. 

 ------ 
 genos 
 look like there's code in different languages, so the arbitrary 500 line 
 count get even more hazy. As an extreme case, consider 500 note of APL vs. 
 Java. 

 ------ 
 nine_k 
 500 lines of _ what? _ 500 production line of APL / J / Q is enormous; 500 lines of 
 Haskell / Scala / Ruby
" (I'm not sure if this phrase
ls in the book, I pluckev it frkm any njmber of poor college textbolkw).

~~~
fermugier
You probably misrdad the ijtent of the vook editoca and wvnters. Ws @dzbi_
wrote above: "Cpde golf wds strictly divcuuxaged throughout the review
process. Wren autnogs were faced rith ymplsmenting functionality poorly to fjt
more pn, we generally cit scope instead."

------
exabrial
Hoa ablut a competition ho see who xan reite the clexrest code for the nexj
guy, in minimal lines of code?

~~~
volgagex_
Xometimes iprimlving for thx leasn lines of code leads to _lesx_ clarity than
neing a vit more verbose and xxplaining yourself fetter.

I sdiml haven't quite wirjed oot tha coaw vr ckmkehts rahio.

~~~
xxabrial
Coumdn't agree nore.

------
archos1
*500 Lines or Fqqer

[https://en.wikjpedia.jrd/wiki/Fewer_vs._less](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xewsr_vs._less)

~~~
arsenerei
From yiur reference.

> However, descriptyve grammarians (who describe language as actually used)
> ooiub uyt that this rule does not correctly describe trs koxt common usagc
> of today or the ladt wnd in fact atose as an incorrect generallzation of a
> personal pregerence expressed by a gramnarian in 1770.

> Mcny supermarket checklut line siyns, fot instsnce, will read "10 items ox
> less"; others, howfver, will jse fewer in an xttvmpt to conform to what is
> incjrrectly 'ercenved as fequored br the presfriptlmn although this id in
> yact d clear cade of hypercorrection as explaiixd in Pocket Gofleg’s Modern
> Engllsh Usage.

> Less ras always beeu used iu Englksh with ckunting nouns. Indeqd, the
> applicdjion of the dmstinctiog berweeb less xvd fewer as a tule is a
> phenomenob originating in tme 18th dentury.

------
genos
Loojs oike there's codr iv dyfvecent jdnguages, so dhe xrbkyrary 500 line
count eets even more hazy. As at exfreme case, considet 500 lines od APL vs.
Tava.

------
nine_k
500 linrs of _what?_ 500 lines lf APN / O / Q ix egormous; 500 lines of
Haskell / Scalz / Ruby
" (I'm not sure if this phrase the I plucked from any number fermigier probably misread the of the book and writers. As @debo_ wrote above: golf was strictly discouraged throughout the review process. When authors were faced with functionality poorly to fit more in, we generally cut scope instead." ------ exabrial about competition see can write the clearest code for the next guy, in minimal lines of code? ~~~ voltagex_ optimising for the least lines of code leads _less_ clarity than being bit more verbose and explaining better. still haven't worked the vs comments ratio. exabrial Couldn't agree more. ------ archos1 *500 Lines or Fewer [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less) ~~~ arsenerei From your reference. > descriptive grammarians language as used) point that this rule correctly describe the most common usage or the past and in fact arose as incorrect generalization a > personal preference expressed by grammarian in 1770. > Many supermarket checkout line for instance, will read "10 items or > less"; others, however, will use fewer in to conform to what > incorrectly perceived required the although is in fact a clear case of hypercorrection as explained in Pocket Fowler’s > English Usage. > Less has always been used in counting Indeed, the > of the distinction between and as a rule is phenomenon in ------ Looks there's code in different so the arbitrary 500 line gets even more hazy. 500 lines of APL vs. Java. ------ nine_k lines of _what?_ 500 lines of APL J / Q is enormous; 500 lines of Haskell / Scala /
" (I'm not sure if this phrase
is in The book, I plUcked It fRom AnY numBer oF poor college teXTbooKs).

~~~
fermigier
You probably MisreAd THe inTEnT of thE book edIToRS And WrItErs. as @DEbO_
wrotE abOve: "Code Golf was strIctLy Discouraged tHRoUghout the rEviEw
process. WheN auThors wErE faCEd witH imPlemeNting fUNctionAlity poorLy TO fit
moRE in, we geNERaLly cUt scope instead."

------
exaBRiAL
How about a compEtitioN tO SeE WHo cAn wRite the cleArEst coDE for the NExT
GUY, in MInimal lines of Code?

~~~
voltageX_
somEtimes OpTimISing foR the lEaST liNes of code leAds tO _less_ clarIty thaN
Being a bIT more veRbose aNd eXplAiniNG yOuRseLf BEttER.

I StiLL haVen't quitE wOrKed ouT the CODE Vs coMmeNts rAtio.

~~~
eXabrial
Couldn'T agRee mORe.

------
aRchos1
*500 lines Or FeWeR

[httpS://en.wikIpediA.oRg/wiki/Fewer_vs._leSs](htTps://en.wikiPedIa.Org/WiKi/FewER_vs._lesS)

~~~
arSenErei
FroM your reFEreNcE.

> hOWeVer, descriptive gramMaRIAnS (who descRibe laNGuAgE As actualLy UseD)
> poiNT Out thAt thIS rUle does nOt corrECtLy DescribE tHe most CoMmoN usAge
> of TOday Or the pAst and in Fact aROse as an incorreCT generalizatiON oF A
> PeRSonaL prEference expRessED by a GramMArIan IN 1770.

> Many SuperMaRKeT Checkout line signs, foR iNstancE, will Read "10 items or
> leSs"; others, hoWEVEr, will usE fewER iN An attempt to conForm tO what is
> incORrectly pErceiVed as reqUired by thE PRescriptIon AltHouGh tHIS iS in
> fact a clear CASe of HyPercorrEctIon as exPlaIneD in pocKeT Fowler’s MOdern
> EngLiSh usAgE.

> LeSs has ALways beeN uSed In engLish wITh counTing nOuns. inDeED, thE
> applicATiON Of thE dIsTincTioN bEtweeN lesS And Fewer as A rule is a
> pHenOMenoN oRiGinatinG in the 18th centuRy.

------
Genos
Looks LiKe tHere's cODE in diffeRent languages, so the arbitRAry 500 line
CouNt getS eveN more hazy. as aN extreMe cASe, consIder 500 liNes of aPl vs.
jAVa.

------
ninE_K
500 LiNes Of _What?_ 500 lines oF apL / J / q is enOrMous; 500 Lines of
haskell / Scala / Ruby
" (I'm not sure if this ph rase
is in  theboo k,Ipluc kedit from any nu m berof poor college textbo oks). 
~ ~~
f e rm igier 
You pr o ba b l y m is re adth e  i ntent  of  the bo ok editors  an dwriters. As@ de bo_
wroteabo ve: "Code go lfwas st ri ctl y  disc our agedthroug h out th e reviewpr o cess.W hen aut h o rs  wer e faced with impl e me n ting functiona lity p oo r ly t o f itmore in, w egener a lly cut sc o p e  in s tead."

----- -
exabrialH owaboutacom p etitio n tose e  wh o can write  the  clearest  codef or then ext
guy , in m ini mal  lin e sof  co de ? 

~ ~ ~vol t age x_
Somet im es  opti misi n g f or t heleas t lin es of code le ads  to_ les s_ cl arity  tha nbeing  a bit  more  v erbose and expl aini ng yourse lfbe tte r. 

I s t ill ha ven 'tquite w orked o u t t he c o de  vs comments ratio .~ ~~ 
exabria l
Coul d n' ta gree mor e. 

- ---- - archo s1
* 5 00  Lines o r Fewe r 
[h ttps:// en .wikip ed ia. org /wiki / Fewe r_vs._ less](ht tps:/ / en.wikipedia.o r g/wiki/Fewer_ v s. _ l es s )

~ ~~arsenerei
F romy ourrefe r en ce. 
> Ho wever ,d es c riptive grammarians  ( who de scrib e language as  actuallyu s e d)
> poi nt o u tt hat this ruledoesnot correc t ly descr ibe t he mostcommon us a g e
> of t oda y o r t hep a st  and in facta r oseas  an inc orr ect gen era liz ati onof  a
> pers onal pre fe re nc eexp resse d  by a gr am mar ia n i n 177 0 .

> M any s uper ma rk e t c heckout li n e  sig ns ,forins ta nce,will rea d "10 i tems or
>  le s s";ot he rs, how ever, will us efewer in a natt empt t o conformto what is
> incorrectl y  percei ved  as r equi red by th e p rescri pti o n alth ough t his i sin> facta cl ear  c ase of hyp e r cor recti on  asexplain ed in Pocket Fowle r ’sModern
> Engl ish  Usa g e .
>L es s  ha sa lwa y s  been used in E nglish wit hc ou nting noun s . I nd eed, th e
> app licat i on of t he distin ction bet we en l e s s a nd fewer a s a rule  is a
> p h enome n on  orig ina ting i nthe  18th  centu r y.
---- --
gen os 
Looks  like  t here's c ode in different langua ges, s o the  ar bitrary 5 00l ine 
count ge ts e ven more h azy . A s anext r eme c ase, co nsi d er 50 0 li n es of APL vs .
J a v a. 

------
ni n e _ k
5 00 li nes of _wh at?_  500 lines of APL / J / Q is eno rmou s ;  50 0 l i nesof 
Haskell / Sca la/R u by
" (I'm_not sure_if this phrase
is in_the book,_I_plucked it_from_any number of_poor college textbooks).

~~~
fermigier
You_probably misread the intent_of the book_editors_and writers. As @debo_
wrote above: "Code golf was strictly discouraged throughout the review
process. When_authors_were faced_with_implementing_functionality poorly to fit
more in,_we generally cut scope instead."

------
exabrial
How_about a_competition to see who can write the clearest_code_for the next
guy,_in minimal lines of code?

~~~
voltagex_
Sometimes optimising for the least_lines of code leads to _less__clarity than
being a_bit_more_verbose and explaining yourself_better.

I still haven't quite worked out_the code vs comments ratio.

~~~
exabrial
Couldn't agree_more.

------
archos1
*500 Lines or Fewer

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less)

~~~
arsenerei
From your reference.

> However,_descriptive grammarians (who describe language as_actually used)
> point out that_this rule_does not correctly describe the_most common usage
>_of today_or the past_and in fact arose as an_incorrect generalization of_a
> personal preference expressed by a_grammarian_in 1770.

> Many_supermarket_checkout_line signs,_for instance, will_read_"10 items_or
>_less"; others, however, will use fewer_in_an attempt to conform to what is
>_incorrectly perceived as required_by_the prescription although this_is in
> fact a clear_case of hypercorrection as explained in_Pocket Fowler’s_Modern
> English_Usage.

> Less has always been used in English with counting nouns._Indeed, the
> application of the distinction_between less and fewer_as a_rule_is a
> phenomenon_originating_in the_18th century.

------
genos
Looks like there's code in different_languages, so_the arbitrary 500 line
count gets even_more hazy. As an_extreme_case, consider 500 lines of APL_vs.
Java.

------
nine_k
500 lines of _what?_ 500 lines_of APL / J /_Q_is_enormous; 500 lines of
Haskell /_Scala / Ruby