With this I will end this discussion.
It's not worse results. It's the same results. Winning a Grand Slam. The solution differs though. I'm a programmer, and I know how solutions to problems may differ. In some cases it's annoying to have inelegant solutions because programs run slower, but almost every time, a working program is a working program, no matter how inelegant your code is. Now, what if my boss comes in and says. "See, I'm not going to pay you as the rest of your team, because your part of the code... it's shit. The program works, but... I don't like it how you use "ifs" all the time."
Come on Slasher, you are better than this.
The goal in programming is to make a working and as much as possible fast-running program. If it does it's job, it's a good program.
The goal in tennis isn't to 'win Slams'. You can put 128 random MTF posters play a Slam and 1 is due to win it. So you are telling me that's the same, we still got our Slam winner.
It's like have a team of programmers that can't even write if a>b then a:=b, and you know how to use for a:= from 1 to b do c:=c+a. Hence, you are the best programmer in your team, you can win your company's 'programmer's Grand Slam', but your team still sucks ass and you don't deserve to be payed as programmers in other companies. Again, deserve
, your company owner can give you millions if he thinks that will somehow bring him wanted results.
Over and out, see you later peeps.