I suppose I assumed less-obvious algorithims always have semantically meaningful differences to more-obvious algorithims But we can hope that this is rarely th

I suppose I assumed less-obvious algorithims always have semantically meaningful differences to more-obvious algorithims But we can hope that this is rarely the case More-obvious always wins if there are never any semantic differences Good programming is finding the most-obvious algorithim while keeping the same semantics -- and even sometimes changing the semantics to make them more obvious In that vein, a side question I often ask myself is, which should the algorithm represent clearly: 1) The problem 2) The solution 3) The transition between those two All 3 have validiy, and result in very different programming paradigm How can I choose one above the other??