OSNews

Oh, don't talk too much about v2 or v3. They worked PERFECTLY on every browser. This is what code is supposed to do: WORK.

This is not about the end result, it's about the coding itself.

And either way, it's a JOKE Eugenia. Just laugh and don't put so much effort into it.

Ha! "working code" isn't necessarily "good code"...

Well, what Adam said is not exactly in line with what the comic portrays. HTML is not a language, so it's not about being "good", it's about actually being "compatible".

Hmmm. I wonder what the 'L' in HTML stands for then.

As it has been pointd out before, the L in HTML stands for Language. So it is one. But HTML is not a programming language. HTML's quality is about compatibility and standard complicance.

In Germany, there are "wannabe professionals" who insist on that they're "programming Internet Sites in HTML" (go count the errors in this statement). :-)

By the same measurement Trabant was a good car since it could transport people between point A and B. It didn't do it safely or well but it did it. Not saying OSnews v2 and v3 was like Trabant (I liked both v2 and v3), only that "it works" isn't a good measurement of quality.

Watched a leg of The Amazing Race with these cars. If I remember right 6 teams, 6 cars.

One car blew out it's engine.
One car transmission jammed.
One car had a flaky transmission and problems with the turn signals.

This is just in one single leg of the race and it had a 50% failure rate. That is one piece of junk of a car.

Hey, don't complain about the Trabant, you could repair it with rubber tape and glue! :-) The Traband was a very service friendly vehicle, not comparable with today's electronically controlled blackboxes. In regards of comfort or security, the Traband could not impress, but it had other strengths. In a country that was low on ressources (GDR), the Trabant was a way to bring "luxury" to the masses. You cannot compare with today where an own car is nothing special, expensive or time consuming (you had to wait several years for your Trabant, as well as for a phone). The same way the GDR built cars, it built computers. Reliable and robust, but heavy and expensive.

It's the same way we talk about tools: There is not "the" tool for everything. You have to decide well which tool is the best one for you to accomplish a certain task.

The same is true for cars. And for (programming) languages.

Having said this, I'm gonna take a ride in a Barkas B1000 rescue vehicle this weekend. :-)



This is true. Quality is not all about working, it's about style and paradigmata, too. Is the code readable? Does it run reliable in every setting it is intended to? It is documented well and understandable? Does it check for errors, how does it handle them? In most cases, "just works" code is of low quality in these regards.

The "just works" solutions are usually the ones that prevail, and it's obvious: Why would you want to change (improve) something that's already doing what it is expected to do?

I liked v3 very much, but v4 now (!) works for me, too.

Everybody likes jokes as long as they are not the target
Chill...

And HTML is a language... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markup_language

Edited 2008-02-05 16:11 UTC

Exactly, I like v3 a lot better than v4.x.

Indeed, this one is nice. I liked "Janitor" too, but that because I'm a BeOS user

Keep it up Thom.

/me pets Ithamar .

Thanks for the compliment - I can say honestly that I won't be able to make 'hits' like this one every time - but I'll try.