There are enough pieces of “smart Code” written by intelligent programmers.The problem is often that no one else understands and can adapt the code. If the programmer is going to work somewhere else this is a big problem and usually results in the complete rewrite of the code.
Really good programmers write simple code that everyone can understand and customize.
A programming genius can elaborate a complex problem into a set of simple subproblems.These sub-problems are so simple that they are solved with an easy to understand solution. The code reads like a book that describes the problem and the solution at the same time.
If you are under genius that an application does something dizzying “knaps”, then I can hope that it is not one piece of code that does something similar.It’s rather a collection of procedures that make it all together (regardless of whether your object-oriented or functional works). All the big programs consist of several subroutines that take on a part.
If there is an error in the program somewhere, it is easier to repair or not even fatal for the whole program (as in: A crash provoking) if all individual tasks have their own place.
A genius programmer knows how to divide a complex problem into granules and that in such a way that the code is understandable for someone who reads it for the first time.There is a difference between an application that depends on several pieces of code to work as desired by the designers and a program where the code relies heavily on other code. The genius therefore knows to acknowledge that in order to deliver a large product, he/she must bring it into small chunks, until the whole is completed. Often the program is already working quite quickly and new possibilities are added to make the program more powerful/useful (iterative delivery).
Clever feat technical powerhouse:
There is a nice variant of Snake on ZX Spectrum written in 90 bytes (!) Assembly code.Well, Snake (and still in a low resolution) is far from being impressive if you’ve just played Doom 4, but the fact that only 90 characters are enough to make a working game is that. It works, however, but is totally unreadable (uses very Spectrum specific addresses for input/output). Impressive feat of programming, but not what you want to maintain if you are not the original author!
The word genie is quite laden.There are plenty of complex pieces of software written by Hyper Intelligent people, but I wonder if that would be good examples. I think it might be better to look at examples where programmers develop and implement an extreme long-term vision. And one of the best examples I find is the work of Donald Knuth.
Donald Knuth is the author of the ever expanding series of standard works on computer algorithms, The Art of Computer Programming.These works belong to the sacred writings of computer science.
While writing the first parts of this magnum opus, in the early ‘ 70, he became frustrated with the quality of text formatting and in particular the format of mathematical formulas.He decided to develop a typography system (in his spare time). This system became TeX, and TeX is to this day the gold standard for the layout of mathematics. Many engineers and exact scientists write their articles in TeX for that reason. TeX is known to contain extremely few bugs and there are some groundbreaking algorithms (e.g. the hyphenation for words).
Not satisfied with the way in which the time was programmed, Knuth devised a new programming paradigm, Literal Programming, and implemented a system to make this a business: WEB.Then he rewrote TeX all the way in WEB. (WEB has never taken a high flight, but is unquestionably functional and an intriguing concept that maybe its time was too far ahead.)
Donald Knuth is now 81 and still very active.The next part of The Art of Computer Programming is coming out (hopefully) this year. It is obviously made up in TeX.
Is Knuth genial?To most standards though. Is there any code in TeX that could only be written by a genius? I doubt it. Could anyone else have developed Donald Knuth TeX? I don’t think so.
‘, ‘ What is the added value of such a thing?Such a genial piece of code is probably not maintainable at all. After all, the mental capacity to understand it has been donated to few. Anyway, to give an example of a piece of code where I get the thought ‘ why I haven’t thought of it ‘, have you ever heard of Duff’s Device?
“,” It’s not that much of a piece of code that only a genius can make, I think you can find that in the direction of compression methods.
But an example of really efficient and actually best genius programming work is Menuetos This “piece” of software I follow a few years.
The speed and stability for me is an example of how it should be.How could be and then hardware development would be quite a few years to stand still.
There will be some too short coming now to MenuetOS.But as with any OS, this OS is a matter of community and marketing machine.