🚀 go-pugleaf

vcc@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (Guest from Vogelback) writes:
> Yes, but doesn't this kind of thinking encourage those who write software, 
> under this condition, not to write good code?  I, for one, when I write
> code, attempt to write it such that I never need to maintain it.  Needless
> to say, I've never been successful on the first try :), but it would seem
> that if I wanted to charge for software support and revisions, I'd want not
> to write good code so my clients would need to keep me around.  This seems
> contrary to all that RMS and FSF are attempting to encourage:  if their
> version of emacs were *really* buggy then we'd all have a reason to keep
> them in business, right?

Well, if you are simply programming for the money, then truly it will
be a program.  However, if i were to ever put out a program, i would
like to make it best i could possibly make it.  Call it pride in
workmanship or whatever, but i wouldn't *want* to put out buggy code.
However, as has been pointed out on another list, creating
applications that can be used by the computer-(il)literate masses is
much more difficult than writing software for people who know how to
use computers (the basic premise behind the macintoy standard
interface).   No matter how good you are at coding, you are highly
unlikely to produce code that everyone can use without some sort of
aid (assumedly by you).

> Just a random thought.
> 
> ---
> christopher j. chen
> northwestern university
> christopher@nuacc.acns.nwu.edu


iain the flippant | You'll PAY To Know What You REALLY Think |
jb3o@andrew.cmu.edu(INTERNET) | Your MIND Left Intentionally Blank |
R746JB3O@cmccvb(BITNET) | SCIENCE DOES NOT REMOVE THE TERROR OF THE GODS|
disclaimer: anything I say may be wrong - I don't represent anyone but me