Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
while browsing for a contains method, I came across the following Q&A
contains-method-for-a-slice
It is said time and again in this Q&A that the method is really trivial to implement. What I don't understand is, if it were so easy to implement, and seeing how DRY is a popular software principle && and most modern languages implement said method , what sort of design reasoning could be involved behind the exclusion of such a simple method?
The triviality of the implementation depends on the scope of the implementation. It is trivial to implement when you know how to compare each value. Application code usually knows how to compare the types used in that application. But it is not trivial to implement in the general case for arbitrary types, and that is the situation for the language and standard library.
Figuring out if a slice contains a certain object is an O(n) operation where n is the length of the slice. This would not change if the language provided a function to do this. If your code relies on frequently checking if a slice contains a certain value, you should reevaluate your choice of data structures; a map is usually better in these kind of cases. Why should the standard library include functions that encourage you to use the wrong data structure for the task you have?
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
My programming knowledge is up to OOP since that was the last thing we covered in the university. However, I am taking 2 courses this summer and I am constantly under pressure, but I am planning to learn data structures along the way too, to be prepared for it next semester.
I had two plans to learn it but I am not sure which one will be more efficient:
-The first one is to skim through and learn about all the types of data structures and how they are implemented.
-The second one is to try instead of just reading and knowing about a data structure, I will go and try to implement it. However, the drawbacks are that its slow and time consuming, so I might not be able to learn all of the data structures in time
Practice using the data structures in your code.
Code those data structures from scratch.
Repeat steps 1 and 2.
There is really no shortcut for that.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Do any computer languages not use a stack data structure to keep track of execution progress?
Or is the use of this data structure an emergent requirement stemming from something inherent to most computer languages or turing machines?
With a traditional "C-style" stack, certain language features are difficult or impossible to implement. For example, closures can't easily be implemented with a traditional stack because closures require a pointer to an old activation record to work correctly and that memory is automatically reclaimed in a C-style stack. As another example, generators and coroutines need their own memory to store local variables and relative offset information and therefore can't easily be implemented if you use a standard stack implementation.
Hope this helps!
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Lets say that my definition of 'rudimentary programming' refers to the fundamental tools employed for a computer to perform a task.
Considering programming rudiments, the learning spectrum usually looks something like this:
Variables, data types and variable memory
Arrays/Lists and their manipulation
Looping and conditionals
Functions
Classes
Multi threading/processing
Streams (hard-disk and web)
My question is, have I missed any of the major rudiments? Is there a 'next' to the spectrum that still eludes me?
I think you missed the most important one: algorithms. Understanding the complexity, know the situation to use them, why use them and more important, how to implement them.
I'm pretty sure that you already know a lot about algorithms but if you think that your tool-knowledge (aka the programming languages) are good enough, you should start focus, more, on the algorithms.
A great book to start is: Introduction to Algorithms, from Thomas H. Cormen
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
What is considered more appropriate style of writing conditional operators?
if(1){
puts("Hello")
}
or
if(1) puts("Hello")
Similar aspects of coding style are welcome too.
That's all depends on your preference, that's why we rarely see people code in the same style.. Moreover, it depends on which programming language you're using.. IMHO, the important thing in coding is code readability and comments, so when your BOSS asks other people to help or develop your code. He /she will spend the least amount of their time to understand your code..
If you ask specifically from your example above, I would prefer the first one.. Because in my OPINION, imagining the WHOLE code, that one will give better readability. HOWEVER, some people may argue that it will spend some of your time typing those brackets over and over..
As per the PSR standards any structure must always enclose the code in parentheses.
The body of each structure MUST be enclosed by braces. This standardizes how the structures look, and reduces the likelihood of introducing errors as new lines get added to the body.
from the official website
Please have a look under control structures section http://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-2/
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I came across the declaration in a software best practices guide that algorithm and code shouldn't get mixed up. I'm not sure what is meant by this? As far as I understand, code is the implementation of the algorithm, isn't is? So, what exactly is meant by this statement? and why it is considered as a good practice?
Thank You!
The context in which the author mentioned would be clearer if you had pasted the surrounding lines.
Though what it would mean to me is, an algorithm is just a clear step-by-step logic that you would use to implement. You would leave out the finer implementation details like selection of the right data structure and other implementation details while you write/design the algorithm.
A good explanation can be found here
An algorithm is a series of steps for solving a problem, completing a task or performing a calculation. Algorithms are usually executed by computer programs but the term can also apply to steps in domains such as mathematics for human problem solving.
Code is a series of steps that machines can execute. In many cases, code is composed in a high level language that is then automatically translated into instructions that machines understand.