D&C Lug - Home Page
Devon & Cornwall Linux Users' Group

[ Date Index ][ Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] GCC compilation? Good C++ book



On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 12:06:17AM +0000, Simon Waters wrote:
It's generally been my opinion that programming is 90% ability to
break down problems and understanding computers and 10% language
syntax.

I know what you mean, but perhaps it is I keep switching
languages for different projects, but I find knowing the object
libraries is a major headache for my brain.

I tend to stick to one language (perl) and use others (C/C++, Java, Tk
and shell) when I need something a little different.

My involvement in a VB 4 project (It started in VB 3) finished
before I'd even managed to work through the Biblio example and
master the data bound controls.

When you master the bundled object libraries then there are the
3rd party ones.

Even though CPAN is rammed full of modules (not all of which work or
are maintained), I follow this formula:

if (time to implement) < (time to learn module) then (home grow)

I find that many modules are massively complex and some of them are
right bloaters. What's the point inusing a funky date manipulation and
formatting modules if all you want is to print the time in a 12 hour
clock format? The benchmarking tells it all.

I know programmers are alledgedly faster working from a blank
sheet in many circumstances, but quality components can change
how you approach a program completely.

There's nothing else than debugging other people's code (IMO).

One programmer I worked with managed to make a mistake
implementing a stack!

Well, he wouldn't be working for us :)

The advent of module repositories and huge swathes of libraries, such
as those that come with perl, VB or Java, has created a trend for what
I call "lego programmers"; people who know no more than to just bolt
components together. Rather annoying when you need someone to create
you a list of prime number, for instance.

Annoyingly we were using a third party Java library that had a very
efficient stack, in the end it needed some extra features [ ... ]

Which is just as bad as it not working, in some cases. If you can
subclass it, then that's brill, but so many classes seem to be be
final, which is annoying.

Maybe I just didn't do enough programming to get very good at
it, most of the coding work has been in maintaining systems
rather than build from scratch.

Certainly, being a jack of all trades is no good. Knowing only a
little of each language means you can't write a good program in any of
them. One of the reasons I use perl so much is not because it might be
the best language for the job, but it's because I know it so well, so
I will do my best job with it, an important distiction, I think.

People who write object libraries seem to think they can draw
one (or three) huge posters with loads of detail to put on the
wall and you'll just see what is available.

In my experience, the best programmers, are the worst documenters.

Cheers

Steve

--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the
message body to unsubscribe.


Lynx friendly