On May 20, 2009, at 4:39 PM, Gregory Brown wrote:

> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Juan Zanos  
> <juan_zanos / talkhouse.com> wrote:
>
>> You want me to have even more files and spend even more time  
>> folding and
>> unfolding things.  And you assume I use a crummy editor and there  
>> is a
>> better one that magically makes a surprising number of wasted lines
>> irrelevant.  I think you accidentally illustrated that extra lines  
>> have a
>> cost.
>
> I didn't accidentally illustrate anything.   And everything has a
> cost.  Why don't you list for yourself the cost of editing code with
> significant white space?
> Maybe for you, those costs are irrelevant.   For me, the costs of ends
> in Ruby code are irrelevant.
>
> But your point was about *readability* not maintainability.   I don't
> think that good project organization is a 'cost' to readability.
>


I'm saying that when all other factors are held  constant more lines is
less readable.  Your arguments ignore that and only place value on
editors and project management when the extra lines exist and
not when they don't.   That's not a level playing field.

Thinking about ways to reduce this overhead in the language is good.