common practice for creating utility functions?

[Edward Elliott]

BartlebyScrivener wrote:

> QOTW
> 
> "Programming is not just creating strings of instructions for a
> computer to execute.  It's also 'literary' in that you are trying to
> communicate a program structure to other humans reading the code." Paul
> Rubin

I take it you've never heard of Donald Knuth or literate programming:

"The main idea is to regard a program as a communication to human beings
rather than as a set of instructions to a computer."

"So you need somebody who's not afraid to write an essay, as well as not
afraid to write a computer program.  They work together perfectly, but you
have to be able to communicate to the computer, and you have to be able to
communicate to the human being, and if you don't do both, then you can't
expect your program to be as successful. Literate programming is just the
best way I know to do both at the same time."

"My schtick is to promote the idea that humans, not computers, read
programs.... I ask programmers to think of themselves as writers, teachers,
expositors. When you're programming, the very act of trying to explain it
to another human being forces you to get more clarity. And then later on,
you can maintain, modify, and port your programs to other platforms much
more easily. Even if your only audience is yourself, everything gets
better."

http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/
http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/lp.html

-- 
Edward Elliott
UC Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall)
complangpython at eddeye dot net