
Reusable vs. Re-editable Code (2018) [pdf] - akkartik
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01966146/document
======
mannykannot
Even in the re-editable case, the author is making heavy use of reusable code,
in both the data-manipulation functions called in the code blocks, and org-
mode itself. Only the tip of the iceberg is re-editable, and I doubt that this
approach scales.

The lesson from this case might be to be suspicious of a 'smart' capability
where you don't know enough, about what it is supposed to do, to be in a
position to validate it.

~~~
jerome-jh
The point of the article is that if a 'smart' capability requires going
through several pages of documentation, it may not worse it. It is exacerbated
when:

\- you fall into an undocumented corner case

\- you use a dynamically typed language (the case in the article) which
essentially makes it impossible to validate the client code, although the API
code may be well validated.

That rings a bell in me, a time I wrote a signal processing library but people
preferred using Numpy directly :,(

