comment on

It's easier to test short focused methods than longer ones, because it's easier to set up the environment for testing (I suppose this is related to coupling) when you have fewer dependencies.

On another note: If you ever had a conversation with a person whose cognitive style and abilities are different from yours you'll know just how different people think about and solve problems. As an example in a typical discussion I cannot keep more than three of the opponents arguments in my head at the same time. This has lead my friends to carefully tailor their style of arguing so they get the three most important arguments in first (or last depending on if I'm in FIFO or LIFO mode :-) knowing that the rest will be discarded. That is a clear example of discrepancy in cognitive abilities.

A bunch of subroutines pose the same problem for me, while the layering and general spatial metaphors of OO saves the day.

Some people probably have a cognitive style more suited to procedural thinking, which means we might not be able to agree on optimum length or paradigm.

/jeorgen

In reply to Re: Short routines matter more in OO? by jeorgen
in thread Short routines matter more in OO? by tilly

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


XP is just a number
	PerlMonks