3 ms·
> to my mind the architecture is a better fit for coding We have to see if it produces better results. Humans have a planning phase, followed be a part-by-part
by jeswin 1y ago
> to my mind the architecture is a better fit for coding
We have to see if it produces better results. Humans have a planning phase, followed be a part-by-part implementation phase. This is reasonably well emulated by plan/architect + codegen tools.
- dboreham 1y agoIt's delusional to think that most software projects can be planned in advance beyond "there will be a beginning, a middle, and an end". People do it, but their efforts are in my experience generally ignored once implementation get underway.
- Retric 1y agoPlanning in software isn’t about following the plan but mapping a viable route to avoid predictable issues. You’re always going to know more about a project as you build it and you should keep updating that plan.
- handfuloflight 1y agolaughs nervously under a waterfall
- lokar 1y agoThat’s true at the project level. But surely when you sit down to actually work for a couple hours you think about what you are going to do, and then mostly do that.
- layer8 1y agoIn my experience it’s more fractal. Any subgoal, however small, may run into its own planning/thinking and then doing sequence, or even have you reconsider the higher-level plan. Of course, it somewhat depends on how run-of-the-mill the overall task is.