I agree, but there are probably some basics that we can all agree on that makes code inelegant.
I have been rewiting some of my own code recently.It was a quick temporary solution that grew and grew. I used OOP to avoid cutting and pasting, but I realise that one central method didn't have any concrete set of input or output paramaters, it changed depending on what was calling it - very nasty. It was essentially doing three things, rather than one. (It worked, as the guy in the article descrbes)
I think seperation of concerns, making one function do one thing etc, is a start in making elegant code. Or at least not fugly like it was before.
I have been rewiting some of my own code recently.It was a quick temporary solution that grew and grew. I used OOP to avoid cutting and pasting, but I realise that one central method didn't have any concrete set of input or output paramaters, it changed depending on what was calling it - very nasty. It was essentially doing three things, rather than one. (It worked, as the guy in the article descrbes)
I think seperation of concerns, making one function do one thing etc, is a start in making elegant code. Or at least not fugly like it was before.