Not at all. Although Hamlet does pretend to be insane, he does so only with some characters; to others, he is as he always was: thoughtful, articulate, loyal. Therefore, it is almost the reverse -- Hamlet seems to contain even more acting because the actor playing Hamlet must play him in two different ways depending on the scene. Hamlet is not actually insane, something that we can tell, in part, from the fact that he is able to turn the madness on and off at will. Hamlet tells Horatio that he plans to act as though he were mad so as to throw off any suspicions Claudius might have. Further, whenever he speaks to Horatio, he is himself; it is only when he speaks to characters like Claudius, Polonius, Ophelia, or Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (people from whom he needs to hide his investigations into his father's murder, for various reasons) that he seems mad. Therefore, Hamlet's apparent madness actually requires a great deal more acting on the part of both the character and the actor playing him, not less.
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