python vs perl lines of code

[Michael Tobis]

John Bokma wrote:
> "akameswaran at gmail.com" <akameswaran at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Ok I'm going to end with a flamebait - but I would posit, ALL OTHER
> > THINGS BEING EQUAL - that a smaller number of characters and lines in
> > code is more maintainable than larger number of characters and lines in
> > the code.

> And I think that's why a lot of people posted very negative, in the hope
> that people would not be tempted to make the above very dumb statement.

Since it's too late to avoid such temptation, could you explain why you
are willing to go so far as to call that statement "very dumb"?

I, for one, consider it rather wise. When I am teaching programming, or
advocating Python, I generally try to include the following advice,
attributed to A. de St.-Exupery:

"La perfection est atteinte non quand il ne reste rien à ajouter, mais
quand il ne reste rien à enlever."

The relevant corrolary is, "he programs best who programs least". I
would have thought this was conventional wisdom among all dynamic
language communities. Isn't that the whole point? By all means go back
to C++ if you like to have three lines for each idea instead of the
other way around.

However, since I habitually make such a fuss about this, I'd hate to be
wrong. Please do explain why you think this idea that terseness is a
virtue is foolish.

mt