This seems reasonable and motivates my bias. But I don't know what to believe anymore.
Any conversation
signals. thinking about shifting my mental framework to identify signals instead of waiting for concepts to be assembled. exploring the amount of energy and opportunities for distractions through the operations of processing what just happened and what is happening to short circuit latent and unnecessary systems. cut through the assembly processes and identify the raw signals. recognizing that naming these "raw signals" is misleading. maybe, shifting observability lower in the stack.
code quality is about coupling.
coupling is not a technical property of the code bytes.
code acquires its meaning in contact with the cultural environment, and coupling is about meaning.
two constants with no semantic relationship are nonetheless coupled in pragmatics if they refer to the same domain concept.
if your goal is to minimise the time integral of future work, you must understand your domain: it decides which lines will need changing.
to carve up a codebase is to carve up the world.
mandelbrot
for y in range(10):
s=''
for x in range(25):
a=[]
for q in range(2):
z=c=x/25*3-2+1j*((y*2+q)/10-1);n=40
while n and abs(z)<2:z=z*z+c;n-=1
a+=[n<5]
s+=" โโโ"[a[0]+2*a[1]]
print(s)
โโ
โโโโโโโโ
โ โโโโโโโโโ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โโโ โโโโโโโโโ
โโโโโโโโ
โ โโโโ
โโ

