In short, the narrator hesitates to kill the elephant because he does not, in fact, want to go through with it. For one thing, killing an elephant is in and of itself a serious matter, since elephants are so valuable. Shooting an elephant is akin to "destroying a huge and costly piece of machinery." More importantly, by the time the narrator encounters the elephant, it is no longer rampaging, but is peacefully and calmly eating grass near the edge of town. But the problem for the narrator is that a crowd of Burmese people has followed him, and they expect him to shoot the beast. He realizes that, although he does not want to kill the animal, he has to in order to, in his words, avoid "looking a fool." He is a representative of the British Empire to the Burmese people, and they expect him to act violently. Shooting the elephant against his better judgment is one example of how imperialism has corrupted the narrator.
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