Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • 1
    @user997112: The close reason is self explanatory. It says: "We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. Doesn't necessarily mean they're correct, but that was the close reason chosen by all three close voters. Commented Dec 18, 2012 at 22:30
  • Anecdotally, I'd say that the reason this question is attracting close votes is that it may be being perceived as a thinly-veiled rant (although I don't think it is). Commented Dec 18, 2012 at 22:35
  • 8
    I'll stick my neck out: I cast the third vote to close as "not constructive" because I think the questioner pretty much answers his own question. "Beautiful" code that doesn't run fast enough to do the job has failed to meet the latency requirement. "Ugly" code that runs fast enough can be made more maintainable through good documentation. How you measure beauty or ugliness is a topic for another question. Commented Dec 18, 2012 at 22:39
  • 1
    The source code for LMAX's Disruptor isn't too ugly. There are some 'to hell with Java's security model' (Unsafe class) parts and some hardware specific modifications (cache-line padded variables) but it's very readable IMO. Commented Dec 19, 2012 at 2:02
  • 5
    @Carson63000, user1598390 and whoever else is interested: If the question ends up closed, feel free to ask about the closure on our Meta site, there's little point in discussing a closure in comments, especially a closure that hasn't happened. Also, keep in mind that every closed question can be re-opened, it's not the end of the world. Except of course if the Mayans were right, in which case it was nice knowing you all! Commented Dec 20, 2012 at 1:42