top-down vs. bottom-up

Fri, 03 Jun 2016 12:52:47 +0200

>>> As I mentioned, that's subjective.
>> I think it is objective.
> The operative words here being "I think".

OK, I should have written just "No." - that
would leave out any doubt, what the operative
word is!

There is also another perspective.

Let's say I'm writing an article on K2
in Swedish. I'm going to do it all LaTeX like
this piece on Kon-Tiki [1]. But before I do
that I write everything in plain text. So here
is a future subsection and a paragraph:

                    ALBERTO ZERAIN

    2008 fanns på K2 även den baskiske
    soloklättraren Alberto Zerain. De flesta på K2
    det året var erfarna klättrare. Men Zerain
    klättrade så bra att till och med sherpas
    förundrat sökte varandras blickar.

So here, I use `center-region' and
`upcase-region' to do an ad-hoc subtitle, just
to make it look nicer as I work. Perhaps that
nicety will make me feel one per mille more
relaxed and clear headed, which will make the
article two per milles the better!

So I absolutely agree it should be there, as it
is so basic. Vanilla Emacs (and vi I suppose)
should excel in doing basic things, because
that is the fundament to the whole structure.

At the universities they like to teach you "the
top-down approach", e.g.

      title     = {Computer Networking (A Top-Down Approach)},
      author    = {James Kurose; Keith Ross},
      year      = 2003,
      publisher = {Addison-Wesley},

Here is were the universities and I agree to
disagree as I every day of the week prefer the
bottom-up approach, were first small building
blocks are perfected until perfection, to
*then* hold a superstructure of might
and magic!

This is analogous to the sport world. There is
not one boxing gym from Alma-Ata (Almaty) to
New York where the coach says "First we'll
learn everything there is to know about boxing.
Then we'll start throwing jabs." The same with
soldiers, sailors, roofers, horsemen, chimney
sweeps, you name it - day one is the BASICS!

So instead, I'd recommend this book on

      author     = {Comer},
      ISBN       = 0138920923,
      publisher  = {Pearson},
      title      = {The Internet Book},
      year       = 1997

In this case, the OP isn't happy with the basic
stuff. So his "might and magic" on top of the
basic stuff is actually a rewind to get the
basic stuff right. And there is nothing wrong
with that. Actually I like it. I still think it
is over-engineering but hey, no one said all
engineers are the same. Some are even very
unsimilar come to think of it...

[1] %% This file:
    %% The Biblatex:
    %% The PDF:

Back to Blogomatic.