> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes.
If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way,
no.

The term "readable" is entirely subjective. As far as am aware there is no
standard for "readable" (in any language, coding or not). Even if such
criteria for "readable" did exist in some institutional document, no author
of code (or anything else) is bound to recognize or adhere to any such
subjective and arbitrary criteria.

What specific definition of "reliable" is being used, and what are the
cases that demonstrates using destructing assignment is not "reliable"?

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 6:50 PM Bob Myers <rtm at gol.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:59 AM guest271314 <guest271314 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Does not destructuring assignment provide a means to achieve the
>> requirement?
>>
>
> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes.
> If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way,
> no.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20190622/79df4393/attachment.html>

> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes. If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way, no.

The term "readable" is entirely subjective. As far as am aware there is no
standard for "readable" (in any language, coding or not). Whether an individual or program can read characters or symbols or not is based on the competency (if the reader is capable, by way of specific knowledge of the meanings of the characters or symbols contained in or on the document or artifact); pre-disposed biases, if any; and interpretation of the reader (based on their specific knowledge of the intent of the author). Even if such
criteria for "readable" did exist in some institutional document, no author
of code (or anything else) is bound to recognize or adhere to any such
subjective and arbitrary criteria.

What specific definition of "reliable" is being used, and what are the
cases that demonstrates using destructing assignment is not "reliable"?

> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes. If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way, no.

The term "readable" is entirely subjective. As far as am aware there is no
standard for "readable" (in any language, coding or not). Whether an individual or program can read characters or symbols or not is based on the competency (if the reader is capable, by way of specific knowledge of the characters or symbols, of reading the characters or symbols), pre-disposed biases, if any, and interpretation of the reader. Even if such
criteria for "readable" did exist in some institutional document, no author
of code (or anything else) is bound to recognize or adhere to any such
subjective and arbitrary criteria.

What specific definition of "reliable" is being used, and what are the
cases that demonstrates using destructing assignment is not "reliable"?

> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes. If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way, no.

The term "readable" is entirely subjective. As far as am aware there is no
standard for "readable" (in any language, coding or not). Whether an individual or program can read characters or symbols or not is based on the competency, pre-disposed biases, if any, and interpretation of the reader. Even if such
criteria for "readable" did exist in some institutional document, no author
of code (or anything else) is bound to recognize or adhere to any such
subjective and arbitrary criteria.

What specific definition of "reliable" is being used, and what are the
cases that demonstrates using destructing assignment is not "reliable"?

> If the requirement is merely to write a function to pick properties, yes. If the requirement is to do that in a more concise, readable, reliable way, no.

The term "readable" is entirely subjective. As far as am aware there is no
standard for "readable" (in any language, coding or not). Even if such
criteria for "readable" did exist in some institutional document, no author
of code (or anything else) is bound to recognize or adhere to any such
subjective and arbitrary criteria.

What specific definition of "reliable" is being used, and what are the
cases that demonstrates using destructing assignment is not "reliable"?