On 6/3/07, S.Volkov <svolkov / comcast.net> wrote:
> "Robert Dober" <robert.dober / gmail.com> wrote in message
> ..
> >> Robert, you are not kind to guys who will maintain your code.
> > That could be discussed, but this is a small entity, from my
> > experience maintenance nightmares come from bad design and code
> > dependencies.
> Sure, you are right.
> But please don't forget, that 'small entity' can cause 'big problem' if
> muliplyed by huge number.
> Given 100 average-level programmers, how many will be able to expand your
> solution
> to handle addition of one more multiplyer, say 7-Gozz?
> Enterprise managers face luck of experienced programmers to execute routine
> maintenance tasks,
> so simple solution for simple task is a _must_.
But what is simple?
(1..100).each{ |x|
   print "Fuzz" if x%3 ==0
   print "Bizz" if x%5
   print x unless x%3*y%5==0
   puts ""
}
Is this simple?
Maybe you are right about the _must_ but then I feel that you are
wrong about the language.
I feel very *strongly* that Ruby is not a language for such code....
Let us maybe take a break, wait for James' resume and what other think
about this and than we might find a better understanding of this.
Boy who said this was a simple Quiz ;)

>
> >> Do you want the job or demonstration of your smartness?
> > This is not very smart a solution, it reflects some features of Ruby,
> > after all they are hiring a Ruby developer not a C or Perl developer.
> I didn't say it was smart solution :)
Hmm I do ;)

>
> >> imho: in any situation: KISS!
> > This is strong an expression, I will not take offense, others might.
> I'm terrybly sorry, no offense was intended (I forgot to mention this
> specifically in first place)!
> ashamed,
No that is exaggerated of course as I said no offense taken.
> Sergey Volkov
Do you like Star Trek?
Reminds me of the famous dialog between bones and Spock:
I am Spock you are bones ;)
>
>
>
>

Robert
-- 
You see things; and you say Why?
But I dream things that never were; and I say Why not?
-- George Bernard Shaw