It is possible for shoemakers to ask themselves whether their art can be applied to make a clog.
In any science worth its salt, acknowledging certain elements as the right ones because they have been accepted by the community is rather normal. Some of those assumptions have been sitting on the racks for so long that the perspective of any new idea not supported by the community causes rejection, although they show signs of reality. This is what it is currently happening, and not from a historical point of view, but from a formal and practical one, even within the same concept.
Before object-oriented programming, developing was quite easy in terms of architecture and design. C or assembler did not play a big part except for a few optimisation algorithms for binary trees or bounded lists. With the arrival of object-oriented programming, this started to change. Design patterns…
This entry is only available in Spanish · La programación imperativa o estructurada, cuya única diferencia básica es tener constancia de que existen las funciones, presenta tres pilares fundamentales. Selección Secuencia Iteración Con estos tres elementos se puede identificar claramente un programa imperativo (C, Java, .NET,…) independientemente de que implemente otros paradigmas (orientado a objetos, genérico…). La selección, el clásico if, lo mencioné en un post anterior, en este caso vamos a comentar la secuencia, que no es más que la limitación que presentan estos lenguajes al tener que ejecutar su código de manera secuencial.
IT physical evolution has become clear, over the past years. Moore´s law is still being followed but its evolution has been sporadic and unequal. Most of the people know that languages as assembler has evolved to closest languages to the natural one, like Pascal, C or high level languages (java, .net, etc.)