On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Fabrizio Giudici
<[email protected]> wrote:
> While I don't agree with the whole example, I think Kevin is right with the
> point that it's a matter of level of abstraction.

I have to question whether constantly moving up that ladder is the
correct way to go.  Specifically, where is the diminishing return
level of abstraction?  My suspicion is that it is a very personal
answer.

I do keep coming back to the literate programming world, though.  It
is just too appealing in how similar it is to how it seems everything
is taught.  I can't help but thinking the "javadoc" style of thinking
you can jump in at any given method to fully understand what is
happening somewhere is a fallacy that causes more harm than is
admitted.

(See http://www.johndcook.com/normal_cdf_inverse.html for a good
example.  Really, any of his posts on the topic.
http://www.johndcook.com/blog/tag/literate-programming/)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to