Amphibians have a three-chambered heart comprised of one ventricle and two atria. Thus, amphibians have a left and right atrium but a single large ventricle. This is different from mammals that have a four-chambered heart with two atria and two ventricles. The ventricle in amphibians is partially separated due to some space left along the separating wall. Blood from the ventricle has two pathways: it can either flow through the pulmonary artery heading to the lungs or through the aorta to the rest of the body. Blood that has been oxygenated in the lungs flows back to the heart through the pulmonary vein and into the left atrium. Deoxygenated blood from the rest of the body flows back to the heart through the sinus venosus and into the right atrium. The left and right atria empty both the oxygenated and deoxygenated blood into the ventricle. The amphibian circulatory system is not as effective as that of mammals in keeping oxygenated and deoxygenated blood flowing separately, but the system is sufficient for the organisms.
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