Comment by bena

Then say ugly. "Shitty" can be ambiguous as you see. Most people would classify buggy code as shitty code.

> Then you've never been around the smartest people. Likely you've been around smarter then average people.

This is essentially using your own belief as proof that your belief is correct. You say I haven't been around the smartest people because I say the smartest people don't do what you claim. You are saying "I'm right therefore you are wrong". Maybe you haven't been around the smartest people.

> Yeah and the smartest people structure the problem in their head in a way normal people can't easily understand. They can hold much more in their head so the structures can be complex.

Complex is easy. Simple is hard. And yes, some things are inherently more complex than others. But the goal is to hold the important things in your head. Offload as much as you can so you can focus on what matters.

> Isn't that my point? Formatting rules are a bunch of pointless minutiae to intelligent people. It doesn't assist them in readability because their intelligence allows them to parse even the shittiest code with complete ease. And I mean aesthetically shitty, not intrinsically shitty.

No. It's not the point you are making.

Also, look at to everything I said. Strict adherence to any one style is not a marker of intelligence. I explicitly said that strict adherence is essentially for people in a wide range of skills. But the best have preferences, but realize that they are more guidelines and readability matters more than the rules.

And the rules should be logical and essentially second nature. Like indenting is completely optional in most languages. But proper indenting allows you to better visualize the flow of the code. Nobody reads/writes minified JavaScript.