Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Perl Destroys Interview Question

by ihb (Deacon)
on Apr 11, 2004 at 23:33 UTC ( #344298=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Perl Destroys Interview Question
in thread Perl Destroys Interview Question

How does this play along with XP (Extreme Programming)? I'm not too familiar with XP myself nor do I have any experience in it, but to my understanding you shouldn't make the general solution if you want to be an extreme programmer. The reason for that would be that it's likely that the spec would be altered in such a way that even your general solution wouldn't solve the new problem. Then you've solved something that wasn't a problem for you to solve, and hence done unnecessary work. The planning for the future would be done by other techniques (such as having well refactored code).

This is how i interpret the XP philosophy. I may very well be wrong. Please correct me if so.


Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Perl Destroys Interview Question
by mr_mischief (Monsignor) on May 03, 2004 at 18:01 UTC
    My understanding of XP suggests you're right. However, no methodology is 100% right in every situation.

    I think that doing a great deal of work to generalize something when there's no need is obviously silly. There's no reason though to do something in a less general way which doesn't run any faster and requires just as much work to implement. I'm talking about looking at the problem as a more general case, not about working a more general case into the code as an afterthought.

    Christopher E. Stith

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://344298]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (3)
As of 2017-05-27 12:58 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?