Jesse's comments about how his code is basically disposable (my word) is interesting.
I think it reflects the nature of flash and its history. For example I am working on a fairly complex project. I have been working on it for more than a year. It has lots of pieces that interact. And what happens is that I get one piece working. Then it has to interact with another piece that I get working, so I have to go back and fix the first piece. And so on. This also relates to ongoing desires to improve the performance of code and to add features. But what is interesting to me is every time I go back to a piece of code I have to relearn it. I do try to comment, and each time I go back, my comments get better because I see what I needed to comment the last time I was "in" the code. Basically, when I go back into an unfamiliar block of code, I find myself often refactoring. It helps me to "re-understand" the code but it also it has this funny effect of improving the quality of code. And each time I do this I add or edit the documentation. Of course I am writing primarily business logic and algorithms, not screen display/UI code which is probably more disposable. And I think this is my point. This issue really does depend not only on the size of the project but the type of code it is. The closer you are to the "edge" of the application, the less important documentation is. Flash and even flex have typically been more UI code than business logic which is often on the server. The more business logic that ends up on the client, the more durable and less disposable the client code will need to be. In other words, as flash becomes a real software development platform, real development methodologies will become more important. Regards Hank On 12/22/05, ryanm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Very well said Paul. Couldn't agree more - mind you this is coming from > > a guy who still writes crappy code. :) > > > Don't get the wrong idea, I still write my share of crappy, last minute, > hacked-together code. But I do try to at least drop a comment in there to > explain why it's so ugly. ;-) > > ryanm > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list [email protected] http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
