Re: Lesson Learned: Don’t write XSLT programs this wa

> Consider what happens once the project is over. Sometimes I can reuse
program#1 on another project
> (usually the program needs a little or a lot of modification). program#2
is specific to the output produced by program#1,
>  so itbs not reusable. program#3 is even more specific. Ditto for the
other programs.
> In other words, at best program#1 is reusable. The other programs are
throwaways. What a waste.

https://medium.com/@scott.boring.sb/dont-write-reusable-code-a857e925b683


Thanks,
Dimitre

On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 6:13 AM Roger L Costello costello@xxxxxxxxx <
xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> For years my strategy in using XSLT to solve complex problems has been
> this:
>
> Identify the series of transformations that must be performed on the input
> data. Create an XSLT program that performs the first transformation.
> Conduct tests to ensure the program works properly. Then create a second
> XSLT program that takes the output of program#1 and performs the second
> transformation on it. Conduct tests to ensure the combination of program#1
> and program#2 produces the correct result. Then do the same for the third
> transformation. And so forth.
>
> The result is a series of transformations applied to the input.
>
> Seems like a reasonable strategy, right?
>
> No, itbs not. Itbs a terrible strategy.
>
> Consider what happens once the project is over. Sometimes I can reuse
> program#1 on another project (usually the program needs a little or a lot
> of modification). program#2 is specific to the output produced by
> program#1, so itbs not reusable. program#3 is even more specific. Ditto
for
> the other programs. In other words, at best program#1 is reusable. The
> other programs are throwaways. What a waste.
>
> Not only are the programs throwaways, they are all tightly coupled to each
> other: program#2 is tightly coupled to program#1, program#3 is tightly
> coupled to program#2, etc.
>
> Dealing with the cognitive load of a complex problem is critical. The
> cognitive load must be reduced. My approach of using a series of
> transformations does nothing to reduce the cognitive load. No doubt there
> are people who can handle a high cognitive load. They can effortlessly
> handle in their mind a bunch of complex transformations simultaneously.
Ibm
> not one of those people. I need things simple. I need a low cognitive load.
>
> My implementation strategy results in horribly brittle, hard-to-debug, and
> error-prone programs.
>
> Recently I read about the Unix philosophy:
>
> - Make each program do one thing well. To do a new job, build afresh
> rather than complicate old programs by adding new "features".
>
> - Expect the output of every program to become the input to another, as
> yet unknown, program. Don't clutter output with extraneous information.
> Avoid stringently columnar or binary input formats. Don't insist on
> interactive input.
>
> - Design and build software, even operating systems, to be tried early,
> ideally within weeks. Don't hesitate to throw away the clumsy parts and
> rebuild them.
>
> - Use tools in preference to unskilled help to lighten a programming task,
> even if you have to detour to build the tools and expect to throw some of
> them out after you've finished using them.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy
>
> Using the command shell, combine tools in any way desired, e.g.,
>
> scatter infile | pic | troff >outfile
>
> When I read that I excitedly thought, bYes! That is the right way to
build
> applications! My, such folly in the way I been my implementing XSLT
> programs all these years. The key to creating good XSLT programs -- and any
> program -- is to make each program do one thing well. Make each program a
> tool. Combine tools using the command shell.b
>
> Lesson Learned: Donbt implement an XSLT program as a series of XSLT
> programs.
>
> /Roger
>
>
>

--
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes may be the
biggest mistake of all
------------------------------------
Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play
-------------------------------------
To achieve the impossible dream, try going to sleep.
-------------------------------------
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
-------------------------------------
Typing monkeys will write all Shakespeare's works in 200yrs.Will they write
all patents, too? :)
-------------------------------------
Sanity is madness put to good use.
-------------------------------------
I finally figured out the only reason to be alive is to enjoy it.