What would you do first if you were new to Programming after a few failed attempts?

Liam Wilson · 8 likes

start by reducing it to teh smallest reproducible piece, then change one variable at a time. You will learn more from a simple version repeated three times than from a perfect plan you never start.

- Write down teh exact error and teh input that caused it.
- Make a tiny example, then add pieces back slowly.
- Keep teh final fix boring and well-named.

Source: mostly hard-won experience and comparing notes with people who stuck with it

Solar Otter · 12 likes

The safe answer is to keep the API boring: clear names, explicit errors and one behavior per function. The a coworking table detail changes the whole answer

Priya Nair · 6 likes

the safe answer is to keep the API boring: clear names explicit errors and one behavior per function. The first week version is even more interesting

Valeria López · 5 likes

Start by reducing it to the smallest reproducible piece, then change one variable at a time. You will learn more from a simple version repeated three times than from a perfect plan you never start.

- Write down the exact error and the input that caused it.
- Make a tiny example, then add pieces back slowly.
- Keep the final fix boring and well-named.

Hope this helps!

Urban Baker · 5 likes

I would log the input, the expected output and the actual output first. Once those three are visible, the bug usually stops feeling mysterious. The Seoul example makes it feel concrete

Budi Santoso · 3 likes

Start by reducing it to the smallest reproducible piece then change one variable at a time. If two options look equal, choose the one that is easier to reverse.

- Write down the exact error and the input that caused it.
- Make a tiny example, then add pieces back slowly.
- Keep the final fix boring and well-named.

Source: mostly hard-won experiance and comparing notes with people who stuck with it

Tanvir Rahman · 3 likes

I am curious what changed your mind

Nima Ahmadi · 1 likes

Appreciate the nuance

Nicolás Díaz · 1 likes

Totally agree, especially for beginners

Maya Williams · 2 likes

Try making a tiny reproduction with no framework code. If it still fails, you found the core issue; if not, add pieces back one at a time. I keep a note about debugging for exactly this reason

Mariam Said · 2 likes

Try making a tiny reproduction with no framework code. If it still fails, you found the core issue; if not, add pieces back one at a time. This pairs weirdly well with idli

Amina Okafor · 2 likes

wonderful detail. It makes the whole thing feel real. It reminds me of a very specific conversation near the kitchen

Noé Petit · 1 likes

I would log the input, the expected output and the actual output first. Once those three are visible, the bug usually stops feeling mysterious. I would love to see a follow-up after 5 weeks

Cedar Otter · 0 likes

That is a much better way to say it

Solar Marauder · 1 likes

I would log the input, the expected output and the actual output first. Once those three are visible, the bug usually stops feeling mysterious. I used to overcomplicate this constantly

Amelia Hughes · 0 likes

The safe answer is to keep the API boring: clear names, explicit errors and one behavior per function. I would test it for 2 days before deciding