Re^5: Perl Monks += TMTOWTDI (fallibility)

Yes, exactly. I wasn't advocating blind trust, either.

Nor was I saying not to ever reinvent the wheel - it's the only way to learn. You just should be very sure your own wheel will end up round wheel before you dismiss existing ones and embark on creating one, when you're writing production code. There's also the issue of not having to maintain the wheel yourself if it's a standard issue one.

And so on.. I think we basically agree here. :)

Makeshifts last the longest.

Comment on Re^5: Perl Monks += TMTOWTDI (fallibility)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re^5: Perl Monks += TMTOWTDI by Anonymous Monk on Apr 16, 2003 at 12:33 UTC
And so on.. I think we basically agree here. :) Not so fast! ;) You just should be very sure your own wheel will end up round wheel before you dismiss existing ones and embark on creating one Ah, but failure makes you appreciate the detail that goes into many programs. It leads to increased understanding of the issues that arise and tradeoffs that you have to make. Even completely "failed" projects can create something usable - knowledge. The maintenance point is a good one as well, better to get other people to do that work (as long as they don't mess with my interfaces ;)	[reply]
Re^7: Perl Monks += TMTOWTDI (fallibility) by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Apr 16, 2003 at 12:56 UTC
Wait, wait, not so fast yourself. I said you should be sure you'll end up with a round wheel when writing production code. When not, feel free to do whatever you wish, of course. `:)` Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]
Re: Re^7: Perl Monks += TMTOWTDI (fallibility) by Anonymous Monk on Apr 16, 2003 at 13:43 UTC
Sorry, I stick to writing new, innovative code in my spare time. That only leaves work for experiments in reinventing wheels. I pity da foo who has to maintain my code. Heh, just kidding =D	[reply]


Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer
	PerlMonks