PHP太烂了;-)

见分晓。

因为我的答案有数百个，可能最后都没人读过，但这是我最讨厌的东西。

如果你是一名程序员，那么你很可能不擅长网页设计/开发

对于程序员来说，这个网站是一个非凡的资源，但如果您正在寻找XHTML/CSS帮助，则绝对是一个糟糕的地方。即使是优秀的Web开发人员也在提供90年代很好的资源链接!

Sure, XHTML and CSS are simple to learn. However, you're not just learning a language! You're learning how to use it well, and very few designers and developers can do that, let alone programmers. It took me ages to become a capable designer and even longer to become a good developer. I could code in HTML from the age of 10 but that didn't mean I was good. Now I am a capable designer in programs like Photoshop and Illustrator, I am perfectly able to write a good website in Notepad and am able to write basic scripts in several languages. Not only that but I have a good nose for Search Engine Optimisation techniques and can easily tell you where the majority of people are going wrong (hint: get some good content!).

Also, this place is a terrible resource for advice on web standards. You should NOT just write code to work in the different browsers. You should ALWAYS follow the standard to future-proof your code. More often than not the fixes you use on your websites will break when the next browser update comes along. Not only that but the good browsers follow standards anyway. Finally, the reason IE was allowed to ruin the Internet was because YOU allowed it by coding your websites for IE! If you're going to continue to do that for Firefox then we'll lose out yet again!

如果你认为基于表格的布局和CSS布局一样好，如果不比CSS布局好，那么你不应该被允许谈论这个话题，至少没有我先把你打倒。此外，如果你认为W3Schools是送学生去的最佳资源，那你就大错特错了。

如果你是Web设计/开发的新手，不要去这个地方(这里都是程序员，而不是Web开发人员)。去一个好的网站设计/开发社区，比如SitePoint。

后藤很好!(这足够有争议了吗) 有时……所以给我们选择吧!例如，BASH不需要去。也许有一些内部原因，但仍然。 此外，goto是汇编语言的构建块。没有if语句!：）

除非你能解释为什么需要继承，否则不要使用它。

您不应该停留在您发现的编写“有效”代码的第一种方法上。

I really don't think this should be controversial, but it is. People see an example from elsewhere in the code, from online, or from some old "Teach yourself Advanced Power SQLJava#BeansServer in 3.14159 minutes" book dated 1999, and they think they know something and they copy it into their code. They don't walk through the example to find out what each line does. They don't think about the design of their program and see if there might be a more organized or more natural way to do the same thing. They don't make any attempt at keeping their skill sets up to date to learn that they are using ideas and methods deprecated in the last year of the previous millenium. They don't seem to have the experience to learn that what they're copying has created specific horrific maintenance burdens for programmers for years and that they can be avoided with a little more thought.

事实上，他们似乎甚至没有意识到做一件事可能有不止一种方法。

I come from the Perl world, where one of the slogans is "There's More Than One Way To Do It." (TMTOWTDI) People who've taken a cursory look at Perl have written it off as "write-only" or "unreadable," largely because they've looked at crappy code written by people with the mindset I described above. Those people have given zero thought to design, maintainability, organization, reduction of duplication in code, coupling, cohesion, encapsulation, etc. They write crap. Those people exist programming in every language, and easy to learn languages with many ways to do things give them plenty of rope and guns to shoot and hang themselves with. Simultaneously.

But if you hang around the Perl world for longer than a cursory look, and watch what the long-timers in the community are doing, you see a remarkable thing: the good Perl programmers spend some time seeking to find the best way to do something. When they're naming a new module, they ask around for suggestions and bounce their ideas off of people. They hand their code out to get looked at, critiqued, and modified. If they have to do something nasty, they encapsulate it in the smallest way possible in a module for use in a more organized way. Several implementations of the same idea might hang around for awhile, but they compete for mindshare and marketshare, and they compete by trying to do the best job, and a big part of that is by making themselves easily maintainable. Really good Perl programmers seem to think hard about what they are doing and looking for the best way to do things, rather than just grabbing the first idea that flits through their brain.

如今，我主要在Java世界中编程。我见过一些非常好的Java代码，但我也见过很多垃圾代码，而且我还看到了更多我在开头描述的心态:人们选择了第一个看起来可以工作的丑陋代码块，而不理解它，也不考虑是否有更好的方法。

You will see both mindsets in every language. I'm not trying to impugn Java specifically. (Actually I really like it in some ways ... maybe that should be my real controversial opinion!) But I'm coming to believe that every programmer needs to spend a good couple of years with a TMTOWTDI-style language, because even though conventional wisdom has it that this leads to chaos and crappy code, it actually seems to produce people who understand that you need to think about the repercussions of what you are doing instead of trusting your language to have been designed to make you do the right thing with no effort.

我确实认为你可能会在另一个方向上走得太远:例如，完美主义完全忽略了你的真正需求和目标(通常是你的业务的真正需求和目标，通常是盈利能力)。但我不认为任何人都能成为一个真正伟大的程序员，除非学会投入一些高于平均水平的努力来思考寻找最好的(或至少是最好的一种)方法来编码他们正在做的事情。

分页从来不是用户想要的

If you start having the discussion about where to do pagination, in the database, in the business logic, on the client, etc. then you are asking the wrong question. If your app is giving back more data than the user needs, figure out a way for the user to narrow down what they need based on real criteria, not arbitrary sized chunks. And if the user really does want all those results, then give them all the results. Who are you helping by giving back 20 at a time? The server? Is that more important than your user?

[编辑:基于评论的澄清]

作为一个真实世界的例子，让我们看看这个Stack Overflow问题。假设我有一个有争议的编程观点。在我发帖之前，我想看看是否已经有了一个解决相同观点的答案，这样我就可以给它投票了。我唯一的选择就是点击每一页的答案。

我更喜欢以下选择之一:

请允许我搜索答案(这是一种根据实际标准缩小我需要的范围的方法)。 允许我看到所有的答案，这样我就可以使用浏览器的“查找”选项(给我所有的结果)。

如果我只是想找到以前读过的答案，但再也找不到了，也可以这样做。我不知道它是什么时候发布的，也不知道它有多少选票，所以排序选项没有帮助。即使我找到了，我仍然需要玩猜谜游戏来找到正确的结果页面。事实上，答案是有页码的，我可以直接点击进入十几个页面中的一个，这一点帮助都没有。

-- bmb