Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
XP is just a number
 
PerlMonks  

Re^6: What do you know, and how do you know that you know it?

by kabel (Chaplain)
on Aug 03, 2004 at 07:27 UTC ( #379545=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^5: What do you know, and how do you know that you know it?
in thread What do you know, and how do you know that you know it?

so you are a step or two deeper to what i was thinking. thanks for clarifying. (sorry, i need to wrap this in my words to get a glimpse of it). second shot *peng*

mathematical proofs are written by few and read by many. lets assume that a script is also read by many. sure, the writer must expect a reader to be at a certain level of skill. otherwise immediate understanding will not be possible. the writer comments all stuff he thinks that can be misinterpreted, and stuff he knows is his usus (and perhaps more); so that if you read the script, it makes perfect sense.

but this seems to be the exception. with the effects of the personal belief system, everyone has an other view of the solution of a problem. so if the reader does not understand, he is either not qualified enough or he cannot see the intentions the writer had while writing it. in the latter case, there is an information loss; this information should actually be represented by a comment.

a perfect script is one that its writer has all his belief knots undone and everything he cannot expect a reader to know is either transported by a good naming scheme or by comments. that means, there are no perfect scripts because it is dependent on the knowledgelevel/belief system of the reader.


Comment on Re^6: What do you know, and how do you know that you know it?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://379545]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others surveying the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-07-29 22:02 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (229 votes), past polls