Re: OT: Why is C so popular?
On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 21:58, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:53:26 -0500
> Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote:
> > Seriously, though, OO languages, being born of academia, were designed
> > *not* to be quick-'n-dirty languages. They were designed with
> > large projects in mind (the whole Software Design Life Cycle bit).
>
> Oh how I would love to find who came up with that particular catch phrase
> and retort with my 10.5's in the posterior of said person.
After having worked in a shop that gave only lip service to the
SDLC, I can guarantee you that in large projects, it is *absolutely*
*positively* 115% necessary. In management's rush to kiss the
customer's arse and promise the world, next week, we were forced
to create some Really Bad C, and had to spend years correcting it,
while also generating new sub-systems and enhancing the old stuff.
> > If you want a (IMHO) good mix between QnD and OO, try Python. It
> > is totally comfortable with procedural coding and OO coding.
>
> Ohhhh yeah. To me coding is organic. I know what I want the program to
> do, I dunno how to get there. Actually doing helps me think and see where to
> go. Ya get this working, then you branch out and do this. In the process
> this doesn't work so you tweak it a little. The whole notion of designing the
> program before you program it seems odd because programming is designing IMHO.
That's called bottom-up coding. I prefer it myself, after I've
roughed out a broad top-down design.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
"they love our milk and honey, but preach about another way of living"
Merle Haggard, "The Fighting Side Of Me"
Reply to: