No matter how "good" or experienced you get you'll always make silly little mistakes. Punctuation problems are probably going to end up as a large percentage of the problems you'll "create" over the course of your programming lifetime. There are tools that will help minimize them, such as the colorized editors etc. But they will still happen.
As most everyone else has said, small chunks, lots of on going testing are better. It will generally be more efficient. I remember times in my past, after writing lots of code without testing, just to spend the next two days debugging all that. No, it's much more efficient to test a little bit, than it is to have to debug for a LONG time.
On the other hand, if you're not very experienced, then you will likely have more logic problems to deal with. You will get better at being able to "run the code through your head" to discover logic problems before seeing the output is not doing what you'd expected or wanted. It will just take time, and "methodology" is really not going to help speed this up very much. But, logic problems still reinforce the write a small bit and test methodology. Obviously writing a lot of problem logic code will take longer to sort out than short bits, so, it still follows that you want to write short amounts and test them often.
Hopefully I've gotten to the heart of your questions,
-Scott
In reply to Re: Programming strategy with no on-going testing
by 5mi11er
in thread Programming strategy with no on-going testing
by punkish
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |