Forum > Other
how often do you opt for new implementation vs re-using someone’s code
gidesa:
--- Quote from: Thaddy on July 10, 2024, 07:26:33 am ---( am now at a project with a major bank where I am the youngest at near 67..oldest is 75.. in the team.. so be versed in geriatrics)
--- End quote ---
I know a Cobol consultant of 80, regularly working in office every morning :-) Yes, there are still many active Cobol programs around (question for another thread: why this?), and less and less experts.
Joanna:
I think it’s admirable that you want to redo code instead of using libraries. You can look at code in library and improve it and it’s a good way to practice programming.
VisualLab:
--- Quote from: Weiss on July 09, 2024, 11:23:53 pm ---Now, I am not going to change that, but feel that this isn’t normal. I also see that I would solve problems faster, and roll on to next ones, if I was more comfortable re-using existing code more efficiently. Or is it a norm, for each to build his own suite of coded solutions? How it works in real world?
--- End quote ---
This is certainly normal behavior. At least that's what I did (or, more precisely, I was forced to do). And I will certainly do it more than once, out of necessity. The example with numerical libraries is absolutely appropriate here. FPC does not have large, convenient and well-equipped numerical libraries that would be part of the package (Lazarus). What I mean here is that there are various GUI data containers in FCL, that LCL includes support for basic controls, etc. However, the standard Lazarus equipment does not include extensive numerical libraries* (matrices, functions, differentiation, etc.). This is completely understandable, because:
- few programs use it (only engineering and scientific ones), - it is difficult and time-consuming to implement and test. There are "external" numerical libraries, you have to install them additionally. Besides, in the case of C, C++ it is similar, only there are slightly more of these libraries (including commercial ones). And now if someone just needs, let's say, implement an approximation, sometimes it's worth implementing it yourself.
And it's similar in other areas, e.g. handling the downloading (capturing) of static images and video recordings from cameras or recording and processing sound. The library doesn't always fit well into the project being developed. Then you have to adapt it to your needs.
This also affects the growth of your own experience. After all, those who wrote libraries considered professional also had to gain this experience at some point.
wp:
--- Quote from: VisualLab on July 10, 2024, 01:47:51 pm ---FPC does not have large, convenient and well-equipped numerical libraries
--- End quote ---
I guess you have not seen NumLib which comes with fpc? Matrices, vectors, determinants, (simple) fitting, root finding, special functions - most of what you need. A disadvantage is its awkward syntax. But it can be managed, and I was able to write a wiki for it: https://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/NumLib_Documentation
Thaddy:
Yes, and it is very good indeed. It only shows it is written by academics and for academics. Most of that can be "solved" by aliasing the function names. It is also one of the oldest fpc libraries, which means a lot: the code is tried and tested.
Thanks for the wiki entry, one of the better ones!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page