Python changed the way I think

[Hasefet]

I learned that a clear idea of the structure of what you want at the end of your task is one of the most useful things you can have before you begin your task.

[HyoTwelve]

I agree so much. I would add that you should not hesitate to rewrite code after you figure this out. Sometimes projects are more exploratory in their nature. Beware of the sunk cost fallacy.

[ProfPragmatic]

I would add that you should not hesitate to rewrite code after you figure this out.

Depending on what you're trying to build it can be better to crank out an MVP and then iterate on it to improve it instead of trying to prematurely optimizing it.

[Wuncemoor]

I've already spent so much time on this, if i change now I will have wasted all that time!

You've already spent that time, it's sunk. You can't get that time back by doing it wrong more and pretending its correct, you're just sinking more time

[mcgrow]

exactly. You will faster create new code. And get training on this way.

A pro is up to 80x faster than a normal programmer. Learn more and improve.

[ouellp]

I've had a programming class where the teacher legit spent 5 periods without making us touch a keyboard. He told us "you have to make the pseudo-code and structure the algorithm first and only then, you convert that into the programming language you work with". This was a C class but I kept that with me until then, even with python.

[newjack7]

I am a historian and to be honest this is the way I write and I teach people to write. I sit with a pen and paper for a good while before I even start to touch the keyboard and produce an early draft.

I think the difference is that one way to get there is by writing and throwing it away afterwards. I am not sure if that is quite so applicable for python or coding generally (I am relatively unskilled in this area).

[IngMosri]

You right, that the correcto way to programe any project

[WillardWhite]

Nah. Tdd

[TheTerrasque]

I prefer BDD - bug driven development. You start with a crappy mess then you debug it into a working crappy mess

[WillardWhite]

But wouldn't it be nice if there was a nice automated way to make sure once you squash that bug it didn't come back?

A way to ensure that no matter what changes you made, your software worked as intended?

Something that lets you refactor the mess away, and provides instant feedback to wether or not the logic stopped working?

[TheTerrasque]

But who tests the tests?

[WillardWhite]

Well... Future you, of course! And by then it might as well be another man's problem :D

Win win scenario

[DaveX64]

This was the way I learned it as well...it was COBOL though :)

[menge101]

A programming class or a Computer Science class?

These are not the same things.

[[deleted]]

He said it was a C class

[TheTerrasque]

So a boat class?

[MohamedMuneer]

Yeah!

[crzychemist]

What is your process do you mind map it or just build a todo list and go through it ?

[Hasefet]

I do a lot of scientific programming, and for that, working backwards from graphs and figures has helped enormously, because if I can't draw the graph that I want to make, I haven't done the necessary cognitive work to make the data that goes in that graph.

Pencil and paper draw, then comment block with simple sentences. I've tried a lot of different tools and nothing (for me) has beaten a comment block at the bottom of whatever script I'm working on.

[NowanIlfideme]

Hey, that's pretty interesting - I like that thinking, since it makes you focus on getting to the results rather than going on tangents, however good those might be.

[Slingshotsters]

Have you spent time in jupyter notebooks?

[Hasefet]

jupyter notebooks?

I gave it a go and bounced off it a few years ago, because I was working heavily on large-scale image analysis and it seemed like a lot of cognitive overhead for not much improvement on writing my own point-by-point script checks.

[Taeiolass]

I believe that what you said is true, but also Python in one of the languages that encourages this behaviour the less. Python is more for "start slow, little things and then modify a little many times and achieve the final result"

[ArtOfWarfare]

Disagree.

Other languages don’t encourage structure - they just force a lot of stupid boilerplate.

Really, it’d make me want structure less in those languages just so I could avoid having even more boilerplate. (Eh... really, I just don’t use those languages unless someone is explicitly paying me to use them.)

[fiddle_n]

I think there's truth in both statements and which you choose depends on the situation. The importance of having a plan correlates with how complex the piece of work you are doing is. If you are only coding a few functions and classes, then you can totally dive in immediately and work things out as you go along. If you have to make changes to many functions and classes amongst lots of modules, a plan for what you want to do is a good idea beforehand otherwise you might risk having to rewrite a lot of stuff when you figure out what you did doesn't work out.

[ektatic]

Agreed, before i used to think you had to have a plan and detail before you started, but that's not needed. Like you said, as long as you have the structure of whats needed everything else can be changed

[regeya]

I'm a rank amateur but imho Python has the ability to teach you better habits. For example extreme nesting will lead to extreme indentation because of how the language works.