4 ms·
I don't really fully understand how the kernel scheduler works, but I know in general how it works, and so I can write software using it. In this sense, a simpl
by peterwwillis 6y ago
I don't really fully understand how the kernel scheduler works, but I know in general how it works, and so I can write software using it. In this sense, a simple implicit abstraction is easier for me to understand than one where I'm peeking under the covers, so to speak.
Even just seeing a few variables or objects passed around, I still don't know exactly what it's doing, or hiding. I can more quickly understand the high level idea with the former example without the details potentially confusing me.
- rvense 6y agoI see what you mean. I think it depends on the type of code and how you interact with it. A library that requires its consumer to keep track of a bunch of data and pass it in and out at the right times when it could just as well handle internally is not a very good library. But if we say that all the code the above example is from an application, where a normal change might involve touching all of the mentioned functions, making it explicit where some variable is used.