Chuchundra, the muskrat, is described as a "brokenhearted little beast." All night long he tries to get up the courage to be able to run into the middle of the room, but he is too cowardly to do so. Instead he just hugs the wall, whimpering and cheeping all night. Not surprisingly, then, when Rikki approaches him, he begs him, almost weeping, not to kill him. Of course, Rikki has no intention of harming the muskrat and tells him so. Then Chuchundra finds another reason to fear Rikki: He imagines that the cobra, Nag, will mistake Chuchundra for Rikki and kill him some night. That thought is equally ludicrous because Rikki is lithe and quick, while Chuchundra is heavy and plodding. Beyond that, Rikki points out that Nag lives in the garden, a place that Chuchundra doesn't go. Chuchundra's fear of Rikki, just like his fear of the middle of the room, is groundless.
As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Comments
Post a Comment