writing code

[Bill Crews]

> My most satisfying programs are written with paper and pencil.  I don't
> do a lot of erasing either - a line through the offending code means
> that I can go back and reuse the code if I backtrack.  Also, when too
> much stuff changes or the code is just wrong, I recopy the entire block
> of code by hand, implementing all of the fixes that I had been logging
> mentally as I was writing.  I also keep the old pieces of paper for a
> time for backtracking.  The program eventually evolves to the point
> were running it is feasible and I am satisfied with it.  When I try
> this approach on the computer, I have too much investment in what I
> have written to change it.  This is really an odd thought - computers
> should make it easier to change, not harder.  Maybe the problem is
> backtracking - "undo" is chronological, I backtrack in "thought
> order".

I find the conclusion drawn here to be suitable for net.bizarre.  Copying
code over by hand with pencil is easier than editing it with an editor?
Too much is invested in code in a text file to change it, whereas with it
on paper, the investment and the ability to change it is less??

Maybe I missed an intended ":-)" here.

-- 

  /  \    Bill Crews
 ( bc )   Cyb Systems, Inc
  \__/    Austin, Texas

[ gatech | ihnp4 | nbires | seismo | ucb-vax ] ! ut-sally ! cyb-eng ! bc