On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Niklas Ekstr�m wrote:
When solving a physics problem you don't start by doing experiments and first after that find out what the experiments was good for, if at all (atleast that's not the way you _should_ do it! ;). From the above you can probably guess what I think about the "hack-and-go" approach I've seen mentioned here at times.
"hack-and-go" is known more formally as a more iterative approach to design. In my experience up-front designs are helpful as roadmaps, but are _very rarely_ accurate once you reach the end of the road.
yes, but jeff, let's keep this in mind when we start using openbios for physics problems. Until then, though, OpenBios looks like an engineering problem, with breadboards and testbeds. Which can be misconstrued as "hack and go" if you haven't been at this kind of thing for very long :-)
ron p.s. Not that I want to interfere with anyone's right to slam everyone on this list :-)
- To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@freiburg.linux.de with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message