Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!ucsd!hub.ucsb.edu!ucsbuxa!3003jalp
From: 3003jalp@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Applied Magnetics)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: hardcopy/productivity inverse correlation
Message-ID: <7242@hub.ucsb.edu>
Date: 15 Nov 90 16:19:39 GMT
References: <46@resumix.UUCP>
Sender: news@hub.ucsb.edu
Distribution: usa
Lines: 21

In article <46@resumix.UUCP> resumix!stevans@decwrl.dec.com (Mark Stevans) writes:
> I invite commentary and/or anecdotes for or against the following thesis:
> 	There is, in general, an inverse correlation between the amount of
> 	source code hardcopy a programmer employs and the productivity of
> 	that programmer.

    I always print my header files, to have the structure defs and
argument lists handy.  Even on a workstation with X, there just isn't
enough room on the screen.  Other than that, I do without paper.
    Well, no, that's not quite true.  Mostly, I write subroutine libraries
(to do finite element analysis, if you must know).  Then I write test
programs to exercise the libraries and flush the bugs out in the open.
(Most of the bugs are in the test programs...  comments, anyone?)
Then the trouble starts:  one of the test programs is too useful for
its own good and I end up adding more bugs --er, features-- to it.
The spaghetti monster lurks.  THEN I need a source listing.
    Printouts do help me to grasp large programs in their entirety.
I'd say there is some truth to your thesis, because I print only when
I am in trouble.

  --Pierre Asselin,  R&D, Applied Magnetics Corp.