good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
When I said "throw one away," I really meant it. :) I don't have any because I invariably delete them. In fact, I don't even bother putting them into cvs.
The idea isn't that I'm cutting corners on the rough draft. The idea is, rather, that in a language like Perl where there are many ways to approach a problem, you don't know what the best approach is until you've mucked about in the problem domain a bit. That's the problem with pseudocode; your pseudocode has to contain a high level algorithm, but you often don't know yet which algorithm to use. So my first draft might be procederal. My next draft might be OO. I might switch to a recursive algorithm, or decide to use Tie::RefHash to move all my filehandles into hash keys, storing related data or objects in the value. Usually, I don't know this until I've written some code. I can't imagine the pseudocode for procedural and OO approaches being the same; if it's that high level, it's mostly useless anyways.
And if your first algorithm guess is always correct... well, only mortals would need pseudocode anyway.
In reply to Re: Re: Re: best practice
by Aighearach
|
|