4 ms·
So wait, you're bitching that programmers were forced to think and to proof-read? Using a pen + paper to write programs isn't a huge deal and I'd do it more of
by omouse 16y ago
So wait, you're bitching that programmers were forced to think and to proof-read?
Using a pen + paper to write programs isn't a huge deal and I'd do it more often if it weren't for the retarded amounts of API docs you have to wade through nowadays before writing a complete program.
- edw519 16y agoSo wait, you're bitching that programmers were forced to think and to proof-read? 1. On any given day, how many times does a compile (or interpretation) of your work fail? 2. On any given day, how many times does a test run of your program give anything other than the most desirable result? If your answer to either question is less than 2, then you're either (a) not working enough or (b) the greatest programmer in the history of the world. I was not "bitching". I was pointing out that in those days you usually got "one shot per day". Think about how this one little fact affected everything you did. There was no such thing as "Release early and often," "Ready, Fire, Aim," "Iterate, iterate, iterate," "Prototype," or "Get User Feedback ASAP." The existing technology simply didn't permit it. When you got one compile per day, you damn well better spend 6 hours per day proofreading. How many hours per day to you spend proofreading? If it's more than .5, then you're wasting your time. It is your morale imperative to use technology to do that for you. We laugh at those pictures and those days, but forget how hardcore you really had to be. We're all standing on the shoulders of giants. Respect.
- jhpriestley 16y agoI often go days or weeks between successive compilations of my programs. Not everyone programs in the "Ready, Fire, Aim" style, nor does everyone agree that it is the best.