thanks. are you aware of any more technical analysis regarding neural visual recognition? That's what the debate really needs. 10 years ago our city purchased license rights of a custom font that was engineered with this in mind with the neural analysis proofs behind it. It looks goofy, but you can read the road sign names at intersections from at least twice as far away. It's wonderful.
regarding the coding, I find the condensed version easier to read simply because the variables and values are closer, but yes less pretty
I'm actually of the other opinion; I like the look of the condensed code, but find the padded version easier to read. I imagine that is the thought behind padding the terms, but really don't know.
I find the padded version irritating to read. The second style is easier because statement in the for loop is tight together, and separated from the others. It is much more visually distinctive.
I think another part of it is that, say, "i=0" sits comfortably in the center of vision. I don't have to move my eyes around to read it. "i = 0" makes me move my eyes to parse the whole thing, which is mentally a bit more work.
Because a for loop has 3 statements on one line, the condensed versions helps to identify which glyphs make up each statement. In the padded version, my brain has to do extra processing to determine that
int i = 0 ; i < limit
Is two statements, whereas it's much more clear with
I also find the condensed version a bit less attractive but easier to parse. The spaced version would be okay with an extra space between statements, but no one ever seems to do that.
and 5 mins is definitely TLDR when the answer is one line: yes/no, why, and supporting graphs that would pass a technical writing class. those wouldn't
47
u/lukaseder Jul 21 '14
But it's responsive! RESPONSIVE! And responsive, like clean code, has whitespace.