|
From: | cr88192 sydney |
Subject: | Re: top-down design + nevermind |
Date: | Tue, 09 Apr 2002 02:55:56 +0000 |
I use both, for my os I use bottom up design and for my compiler I used top down. main difference: top down is a lot faster it would seem (a few hours vs. months), however top down becomes increasingly harder as complexity increases (at least in my experience). also top down tends to yeild code which is quite difficult to reuse in another project (my compiler + my os), and quite difficult to change later or maintain...this is related to recent guile-snarf weirdness but could be said to apply generally to ends such as setting guile's direction. top-down design values interface elegance more than implementation elegance. the implementation does what it needs to support the interface and in return for bearing this burden is given the freedom to evolve. this is obviously in contrast to bottom-up design which i believe can get a lot of unfocused work done but often presumes to know the future too much in practice, eventually causing re-design, because elegance is measured in the implementation and guesses are made about usage. either style of design is fun. people write books about their own personal design philosophies and how it helps you (10min a day). in any case, what users perceive determines their happiness w/ the result. so how to choose the style that fits best for the job?
what is guile's direction, btw?
I think it is more bottom up...no one started coding an ide and came up with guile/scm in the process. just now are ide's starting to form... (as far as I know).
in a whole cs and science in general seem to be a bottom up process, with occasional "products" that are built in the top down manner...
I support bottom up in general, but would not recommend it if time is a big issue...
_________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |