6 ms·

I can only hope I will never have to work in a team with someone like you. That would definitely be a massive waste of time. A typical workflow based on a pseu

by sklogic 10y ago

I can only hope I will never have to work in a team with someone like you. That would definitely be a massive waste of time. A typical workflow based on a pseudocode is very simple and efficient: you solve your problem in a pseudocode - an informal language that does not yet exist but captures the essense of the problem. Then, while still on a whiteboard, you refine your pseudocode into something still "pseudo" (i.e., a made up language that does not exist), but formal this time. It may require a couple of iterations to reach perfection. Then it is pretty much done, the only thing left is to implement this DSL, which is trivial in most of the cases. This workflow is far more efficient than anything keyboard stomping kids can achieve in their fixed, always unsuitable, overbloated languages.

Clubber 10y ago
Ok, so I guess by your omission, you agree that pseudocode is not code and flow charts are also not pseudocode. I don't care about the rest, you can whiteboard all you want. We analyze the problem, then solve it in our heads, usually by the time we've finished talking about it. White boarding just seems way over the top, especially if it takes more than one person to solve a problem every day. Sounds like development by committee. What's 2+2? Lets go to the whiteboard! Out of curiosity, what industry are you in and stack do you use?
- sklogic 10y ago
  > you agree that pseudocode is not code and flow charts are also not pseudocode What? I just demonstrated that pseudocode is an ultimate form of a code, flowcharts included (they're just a graphical pseudocode). Maybe you do not understand what does the word "code" mean? > What's 2+2? Is it an average complexity of the problems you're solving? > stack do you use? Even your choice of words betrays you. You're a web coder, aren't you? Just today I spent somewhere around 3 hours writing pseudocode on a piece of paper, and about 30 minutes typing it on a keyboard, testing and debugging. And it's about a typical proportion.
  - Clubber 10y ago
    Pseudocode has a definition, you can't just make one up in an attempt to not look foolish. No, automation with AI. DSS mostly. Stacks aren't just for web. I guess if you are unwilling to share your stack or any information other than the fact that you write stuff on paper and don't know what pseudocode is, then we don't have much to discuss, and you haven't really made any convincing arguments to your "superior" coding methods. I've seen enough BS in my 20 years to recognize yours.
    - sklogic 10y ago
      > Pseudocode has a definition, you can't just make one up I'm using exactly the same definition: pseudocode is a made-up language which may or may not vaguely resemble some existing language features. > Stacks aren't just for web. Yet, only hipstors use this word in such a context. I explained the methodology in detail. It is agnostic of a target language or even problem domain. I'm using it even when I'm writing a pure C++ code, not just when I'm building DSLs directly.
      - Clubber 10y ago
        You have a strange view of reality, my friend.
        sklogic 10y ago
        A mindless keyboard stomper is trying to say something about a "reality". Funny. Go, solve your "2+2" problems. Hope you have a high enough character-per-second typing rate for this.
        Clubber 10y ago
        Let it go, you're wrong. It's obvious that you know you're wrong, otherwise you would argue your position rather than throwing personal insults and a hissy fit. Pseudocode is not code. Flowcharts are not pseudocode. You also didn't describe your stack. I just see some fresh meat who desperately wants people to take him seriously, but he has a hard time with it because he's kinda childish, very defensive, and can't argue his point. Anyway, this discussion is counterproductive, so I'm going to stop reading after this one.

by sklogic 10y ago

Clubber 10y ago

Ok, so I guess by your omission, you agree that pseudocode is not code and flow charts are also not pseudocode. I don't care about the rest, you can whiteboard all you want. We analyze the problem, then solve it in our heads, usually by the time we've finished talking about it. White boarding just seems way over the top, especially if it takes more than one person to solve a problem every day. Sounds like development by committee. What's 2+2? Lets go to the whiteboard! Out of curiosity, what industry are you in and stack do you use?

sklogic 10y ago
> you agree that pseudocode is not code and flow charts are also not pseudocode What? I just demonstrated that pseudocode is an ultimate form of a code, flowcharts included (they're just a graphical pseudocode). Maybe you do not understand what does the word "code" mean? > What's 2+2? Is it an average complexity of the problems you're solving? > stack do you use? Even your choice of words betrays you. You're a web coder, aren't you? Just today I spent somewhere around 3 hours writing pseudocode on a piece of paper, and about 30 minutes typing it on a keyboard, testing and debugging. And it's about a typical proportion.
- Clubber 10y ago
  Pseudocode has a definition, you can't just make one up in an attempt to not look foolish. No, automation with AI. DSS mostly. Stacks aren't just for web. I guess if you are unwilling to share your stack or any information other than the fact that you write stuff on paper and don't know what pseudocode is, then we don't have much to discuss, and you haven't really made any convincing arguments to your "superior" coding methods. I've seen enough BS in my 20 years to recognize yours.
  - sklogic 10y ago
    > Pseudocode has a definition, you can't just make one up I'm using exactly the same definition: pseudocode is a made-up language which may or may not vaguely resemble some existing language features. > Stacks aren't just for web. Yet, only hipstors use this word in such a context. I explained the methodology in detail. It is agnostic of a target language or even problem domain. I'm using it even when I'm writing a pure C++ code, not just when I'm building DSLs directly.
    - Clubber 10y ago
      You have a strange view of reality, my friend.
      - sklogic 10y ago
        A mindless keyboard stomper is trying to say something about a "reality". Funny. Go, solve your "2+2" problems. Hope you have a high enough character-per-second typing rate for this.
        Clubber 10y ago
        Let it go, you're wrong. It's obvious that you know you're wrong, otherwise you would argue your position rather than throwing personal insults and a hissy fit. Pseudocode is not code. Flowcharts are not pseudocode. You also didn't describe your stack. I just see some fresh meat who desperately wants people to take him seriously, but he has a hard time with it because he's kinda childish, very defensive, and can't argue his point. Anyway, this discussion is counterproductive, so I'm going to stop reading after this one.