Pseudo-Code and Utility

[chromatic]

I use pseudo-code fairly often in big projects, especially when I'm facing a very hairy solution. When I run up against a sticky problem, I go for a walk or read or do something else until a solution presents itself.

Then I have to rush back and write down (or type) enough to get the shape of the answer out of my head and somewhere I can refer to it later.

It's a little like literate programming, perhaps, where the programmer mixes his design ideas with actual code. I'm not as strict as that (running a tangler preprocessor seems like a waste of my valuable time), but I do leave in comments where I need to put flesh on bare bones. When things work, then I take most of them out.

Pseudo-code definitely has a place in my style... comments are for communication -- with myself, with other programmers. I'll use them whenever I can.

[gryng]

Oh, well for large programs (which was not what I was writing for), I will draw big boxes and put labels and arrows, or do something so that I can understand what my data will look like and where it will go. I rarely put down anything about my code though, perhaps which type of algorithm I plan on using. Or in the case of something more custom, I'll detail that in pseudo code, (C-ish), or mostly correct/abbreviated perl.

But as I said, I mainly concern myself with the data structures. As they say: "Show me your flow charts and I will continue to be confused, but let me see your data structures, then, aha!" -- I know, and so should most every programmer, the how to access most any data structure. The most important part of my program is choosing which one I'll use.

Gosh, we all are good at continuing a nice flowing-topic converstation, no?

Ciao,
Gryn

-- It may say gryng but it's spelled Gryn :) --