Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmum.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watmum!cdshaw
From: cdshaw@watmum.UUCP (Chris Shaw)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: "writing code"
Message-ID: <227@watmum.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26-Jul-85 03:23:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: watmum.227
Posted: Fri Jul 26 03:23:08 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jul-85 03:19:12 EDT
References: <418@spar.UUCP> <408@utastro.UUCP>
Reply-To: cdshaw@watmum.UUCP (Chris Shaw)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 36

>General question: does anybody "write code" on paper first any more?
>-- 
>Ed Nather


For me, there is a choice: write it twice (on paper then on screen),
or write it once (on screen only).

However, it isn't as hard-and-fast as that. This only truly works for 
simple stuff. For hard programs, I use paper for "getting the algorithm 
into my head". Recently, for example, I had to do a complicated data structure
conversion. The result was terrifically simple, but the core of the
thing was a...
		x[ --b[ x[ --b[i] ] ] ] = i ;

..kind of affair, which required a lot of thought, and had to be designed
with pictures of linked data structures, etc. etc.

The point of all this is that the tools called "paper & pencil" are 
inadequate for designing programs at the textual level, because line 
insertion is improbable, and looks like hell if you do more than a little.

Drawing pictures with pencil is easy, though, and impossible on your
normal terminal. If I had access to a good graphics package, one with real
flexibility & "definable actions", then I'd drop paper altogether for design.

The conclusion is that this is really an ergonomics issue (if I take the
meaning correctly). Tools that are completely satisfactory/comfortable 
will displace those that aren't.


Chris Shaw    watmath!watmum!cdshaw  or  cdshaw@watmath
University of Waterloo

Work is the curse of the drinking classes.
		- Oscar Wilde