[hcarvalhoalves]

> ML library (...) It was written 4 years ago by a research scientist (...)

Do you believe the language is the issue, been written by someone not trained on software engineering practices?

Would you find untested (I'm betting this code you inherited lacks tests, from experience working w/ ML research code artifacts) verbose Algol-family code any easier to understand?

[mabbo]

You're not wrong, there are so many sins in the creation of this beast. A test would at least give me some purchase to grip the logic from.

But we own lots of legacy stuff. It's only this one that gives me a headache.

Honestly, I wish it had bugs or failed occasionally so I could justify replacing it!

[jgalt212]

Yes, agreed. That being said, there are languages (without naming names) that lend themselves to readability by others and those that don't.