Re^2: Can you make it nicer?

[choroba]

Let me disagree, even if the original code was not the worst example I could have brought up.

1. I was staring at the code for a long time before I understood what it does (originally, there was inconsistent indentation, global variables with meaningless names, almost no whitespace). I had to run it to see whether the numeric constants were correct and what the behaviour was for larger numbers.
2. Here I have to agree. I was not satisfied with my solution, that was why I asked here. To run an exhaustive test, you can modify the list to

   q(), 0 .. 1e12
   

   Reserve enough time, though.
3. Business justification: I am the maintainer of the code. If the code changes only when fixing bugs, it will stay in the nineties and become unmaintainable. Without refactoring, the code becomes dead, and accumulates risk: at one point in the future, a bug or feature request will appear that will not be possible.

   Working with always enough assigned tickets to prevent any creativity leads to exhaustion. It will make me leave your company, which means «business cost»: you invested in the hiring process and in training me. Moreover, trust (both to expert opinions and business decisions) makes the working environment better.