Re: Term for elegant, efficient, tight code?

["Michael West" <mbwest -at- removebigpond -dot- net -dot- au>]

"Doc" wrote:

> In other words, successful compilation, successful operation, and
> efficiency are required for code or any other solution to be
> considered "elegant".

This is consistent with my knowledge of how the
term "elegant" is used in technical and scientific
contexts. It seems impossible to think of a scientist
applying the term "elegant" to a solution that has been
proved wrong (except perhaps in irony) -- just as it
seems impossible to think of "elegant" code that won't
compile.

I see an interesting parallel here with the recurring threads
regarding "good writing" that is "technically inaccurate."
How can it be "good" in any important sense if it wrong
or misleading? Only if you omit "fitness for purpose" from
criteria for "good" or "elegant" can you arrive at such a
twisted conclusion.
--
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Robohelp X3, from eHelp, lets you quickly and easily create 
professional Help systems for all your Windows and Web-based 
applications, including Net. 

Order RoboHelp X3 in May and receive a $100 mail-in rebate, PLUS
free RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module. 
 
Order RoboHelp today: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.