|
|
|
|
|
by dancesdrunk
4814 days ago
|
|
It is decent advice but to be taken with a grain of salt - I've worked with developers who just dive in to the project, no plan in their head and just figuring out as they go along. What you're left with is a mess of code, hacks and workarounds - it works, definitely does, but maintaining or extending it is a nightmare. On the other hand you have projects with incredibly detailed architectures all mapped out, way too much time discussing / planning / envisioning what to build, when to build it and how best to go about it. Not a single one I can think of actually followed the plan (you will always get kinks in the road), and as such these things are always over due and over budget. I guess it's more about finding a balance with what works - perhaps keep an end goal in sight; with a simplistic high level overview of the project/feature, thus giving you the freedom to move around any problems that may arise, but also not tying you down to a detailed plan / architecture that almost certainly will need changing. Iterate fast, stay flexible(?) But one thing I definitely agree with - and that's to get started immediately; whether that's to plan or to code - just start. It will always take longer than you think, and that last 10% is equivalent to first 90%, if not more. |
|
I'm actually thinking about Fabrice Bellard, who was featured in a article that was met with success here two months ago[1].
> Bellard made it seem natural to pull together his mathematical insight, broad experience at instruction-level coding, and careful engineering to advance the field this way
When you look at his achievements[2], I have trouble finding one that would have succeeded with OP's "advice". Between an app for coffee-lovers and QEMU, I think the careful thinking and engineering crushes the hype of "let's do it". Sure it sounds good, but that is not the way you will achieve something meaningful.
I may sound like an ass while it is not my goal, but
- I'm kind of surprised to see the success of this article (50 votes for 2 hours) given the low level and amount of content it offers
- I distrust analogies, and this gamma-correction one is definitely unsound (not to say dumb)
1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5187585
2: http://bellard.org/