I see your number one as reiterating what I was saying, not disagreeing.
A personal code of conduct is not "a load of crap." It has a limited but useful role in framing and shaping behavior. Like any system of guidance, it exists to provide the default and usual path. Each programming language culture has its own code of conduct, encouraging some behavior and discouraging other behavior, that stems from the culture's principals. Of course, there are exceptions and we should be vigilant in knowing what justifies an exception. However, just because there are exceptions does not mean that learning the code of conduct of a language is useless or that documents thereof are loads of crap.
What do you mean, "you'll be a better person"?
I never said that refraining from swearing was a core principal, in fact it is far from a core principal. I find cursing with abandon to be a petty indulgence and unbecoming. However, being raised to appreciate why things are inappropriate is better than not passing along our cultural heritage of propriety and respect.
I understand that it is more popular to refrain from instilling a strong sense of what is appropriate and inappropriate in children these days because of the influences of moral relativism. I believe this is a disservice and negligent parenting. I do not presume that my sense of right and wrong should be the sense that others must accept. Nor do I believe that my views on what constitutes correct behavior at such a fine level of granularity as word choice make me superior to anyone else in any absolute sense.
Within the context of word choice, being more precise, informative and salient is better than talking about excrement, fornication or damnation.
Exceptional circumstances do not invalidate codes of conduct.
This statement clearly defines a "code of conduct" as a rigid set of rules that should always apply. Now you say:
[a code of conduct] has a limited but useful role in framing and shaping behavior.
That contradicts the previous statement. I'm glad you changed your mind, but why not admit you did?
Within the context of word choice, being more precise, informative and salient is better than talking about excrement, fornication or damnation.
I don't disagree with that. I don't swear for no reason - at least not in writing. I merely disagreed with your apparent sense of superiority. Since you've relinquished that too, I guess we're in agreement.
PS: Btw, it's "Principle". "Principal" is an official rank. Principle is a guideline.
When did I "clearly defines a 'code of conduct' as a rigid set of rules that should always apply" ? As qqq pointed out in his or her first comment on my statement, I make the case for infrequency, not prohibition. In my next reply, I affirm that. How did I change my mind?
How did I come off as having a 'sense of superiority'? Please inform me so that I can avoid doing the same in the future.
I always get principle and principal confused, thanks for clarifying.
A personal code of conduct is not "a load of crap." It has a limited but useful role in framing and shaping behavior. Like any system of guidance, it exists to provide the default and usual path. Each programming language culture has its own code of conduct, encouraging some behavior and discouraging other behavior, that stems from the culture's principals. Of course, there are exceptions and we should be vigilant in knowing what justifies an exception. However, just because there are exceptions does not mean that learning the code of conduct of a language is useless or that documents thereof are loads of crap.
What do you mean, "you'll be a better person"?
I never said that refraining from swearing was a core principal, in fact it is far from a core principal. I find cursing with abandon to be a petty indulgence and unbecoming. However, being raised to appreciate why things are inappropriate is better than not passing along our cultural heritage of propriety and respect.
I understand that it is more popular to refrain from instilling a strong sense of what is appropriate and inappropriate in children these days because of the influences of moral relativism. I believe this is a disservice and negligent parenting. I do not presume that my sense of right and wrong should be the sense that others must accept. Nor do I believe that my views on what constitutes correct behavior at such a fine level of granularity as word choice make me superior to anyone else in any absolute sense.
Within the context of word choice, being more precise, informative and salient is better than talking about excrement, fornication or damnation.