Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 20:44:35 -0400
BubbaGump wrote:
rhapgood@xxxxxxxxx wrote:.... snip ...
I'm trying to get a feel for what people now consider more important,
optimisations or debugging ability. In the past with such tight memory
limits I would have said optimisations but now with expanded-memory
parts becoming cheaper I would think that debugging ability is more
important in a development tool. It's is not exactly a black and
white question, debug or smallused, but more a ratio. eg. 50% debug/
50% optimised or 70% debug/30% optimised, etc.
Programming is an art. Not only is it not a black and white question,
but percentages don't make sense either. The style of a product
depends on the circumstances and the arbitrary preferences of the
a-holes involved in its development or its use. There is no right or
wrong.
Besides which an application with bugs in it is unusable until the
bugs are removed. You can always change the optimization level
applied.
--
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
<http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423>
<http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html>
<http://kadaitcha.cx/vista/dogsbreakfast/index.html>
cbfalconer at maineline dot net
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
- References:
- What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: rhapgood
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: BubbaGump
- What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Prev by Date: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Next by Date: Re: Byte-wise boolean optimisation
- Previous by thread: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Next by thread: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
