You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
3 points

I’d guess it’s less true for something statically typed, just because that reduces the ways it can be unintuitive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I firmly believe that every language has an equal proportion of spaghetti code to clean code. The only factor that might screw with this is how much a language is used in industry, which I’d expect raises the ratio. However, there’s plenty of hobbyists writing spaghetti code too so I don’t think even that factor has much effect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Really? Doesn’t that imply non-spaghetti brainfuck or assembly?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Okay, I’ll grant you brainfuck… As for assembly, I don’t think it’s inherently spaghetti. You can split it up into functions just like you can with an actual programming language. It’s not impossible to make structured code.

That said, I never coded assembly outside of a mandatory university course, so I don’t feel super confident in saying that. But I don’t think of it as a programming language anyway - it’s a 1:1 translation to/from machine code, and machine code isn’t meant to make programming easy or scalable.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Programmer Humor

!programmerhumor@lemmy.ml

Create post

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

  • Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
  • No NSFW content.
  • Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

Community stats

  • 5.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 884

    Posts

  • 8.9K

    Comments

Community moderators