我正在对初级(也许是高级)软件工程师所犯的常见错误和错误假设进行一些研究。
你坚持时间最长、最终被纠正的假设是什么?
例如，我误解了整数的大小不是标准的，而是取决于语言和目标。说起来有点尴尬，但事实就是这样。
坦率地说;你有什么坚定的信念?你大概坚持了多长时间?它可以是关于一种算法、一种语言、一个编程概念、测试，或者任何关于编程、编程语言或计算机科学的东西。
当前回答
总有一天，我会有一个现实的想法，那就是构建一些重要的代码/系统/什么的需要多长时间。
其他回答
代码越少越好。现在我知道，有时候如果代码行数更多，就更容易阅读/理解，这是值得的
@Kyralessa: It's worth noting that on most processors, in assembly/machine language, it's possible for functions to return someplace other than their caller while leaving the stack in good condition. Indeed, there are a variety of situations where this can be useful. One variation I first saw on the 6502, though it works even better on the Z80, was a print-message routine where the text to be printed immediately followed the call instruction; execution would resume after the zero terminator (or, as a slight optimization when using the Z80, at the zero terminator, since letting the zero byte be executed as a NOP would be cheaper than trying to avoid it).
有趣的是，在许多现代语言中，函数都有一个正常的退出点(将在调用之后恢复执行)，但也可以通过抛出异常退出。即使在C语言中，也可以使用setjmp/longjmp来模拟这种行为。
总是没有足够的时间在最后期限前完成。
My co-workers were/are producing supposedly bad code because they sucked/suck. It took me a while to learn that I should first check what really happened. Most of the times, bad code was caused by lack of management, customers who didn't want to check what they really wanted and started changing their minds like there's no tomorrow, or other circunstances out of anyone's control, like economic crysis. Customers demand "for yesterday" features because they are stupid: Not really. It's about communication. If someone tells them it everything can really be done in 1 week, guess what? they'll want it in 1 week. "Never change code that works". This is not a good thing IMO. You obviously don't have to change what's really working. However, if you never change a piece of code because it's supposedly working and it's too complex to change, you may end up finding out that code isn't really doing what it's supposed to do. Eg: I've seen a sales commission calculation software doing wrong calculations for two years because nobody wanted to maintain the software. Nobody at sales knew about it. The formula was so complex they didn't really know how to check the numbers.
这种简单性几乎总能战胜复杂性。愚蠢的规则。
编辑:正如葛格所说，我把这个颠倒了。我的思绪一定是在回复中迷失了。如果使用得当，简单性几乎总是能让代码变得更好。
