我可能花了几天时间试图减少业务层使用的内存，后来才意识到项目的WinForms (GUI)使用的内存是应用程序其他部分的4倍多。

我仍然对以下的一些误解感到困扰——尽管我知道这些误解是正确的，但我仍然试图抓住它们不放:

All stakeholders will make decisions about software design objectively. Those that aren't embroiled in writing the code make all sorts of decisions based entirely on emotion that don't always make sense to us developers. Project budgets always make sense - I've seen companies that are quite happy to drop [just for example] $50,000 a month for years rather than pay $250,000 to have a project completed in 6 months. The government for one loses their annual budget if they don't spend it - so spend it they will, come hell or high water. It astounds me at how many project dollars are wasted on things like this. You should always use the right tools for the right job - sometimes this decision is not in your hands. Sometimes it comes down from on high that "thou shalt use X technology" for this project, leaving you thinking "WTF! Who came up with that ridiculous idea?"... the guy paying your paycheque, that's who, now get it done. Programming ideology comes first and foremost, everything else is secondary. In reality, deadlines and business objectives need to be met in order to get your paycheque. Sometimes you make the worst decisions because you just don't have time to do it the right way... just as sometimes that word is on the tip of your tongue but the minute it takes to recall it makes you choose a different and less ideal word. There isn't always time to do it right, sometimes there is only time to do it - however that may be. Hence oft' seen anti-patterns used by so called experienced developers who have to knock out a solution to a problem 10 minutes before the presentation deadline for the software being delivered to your best client tomorrow.

变量实际上只是内存中特定区域的名称。

我可以说服传统的过程程序员，为什么OOP经常提供更好的解决方案。

也就是说，一种描述世界的语言需要有描述复杂对象及其关系的能力。

争论通常包括关于抽象类的废话，我的回答是“不是所有的OOP程序员都刚从Uni毕业，还沉迷于抽象”。或者是经典的，“在面向对象编程中，没有什么是我用严格的过程式编程做不到的”，对此我通常会回答，“不是你能做到，而是如果你有一个更广泛的工具集，你是否会做到”。

我已经学会接受他们和我看世界的角度不同这一事实。

我很早就开始学习编程了。那时我14岁左右。我有各种疯狂的想法，但不要问我准确的时间，因为那是很久以前的事了。

Ok, so, I believed for a while that if you use the term synchronize in Java, then Java solves this nasting synchronizing thing for you I believed for at least half a year, likely more, that static typing would improve performance. I believed that freeing something would return memory back to the OS. I believed that malloc calls boil down to checking if there is enough free space on the OS, so malloc would be inexpensive. I thought a long while that Java was built with all the benefits and flaws of the other languages in mind, into a "perfect blend" that would take the best properties of the other languages and reject the mistakes. I vastly overestimated the number of cases where LinkedLists outperform ArrayLists. I thought that NP-hardness was a proof that no INSTANCE could be solved efficiently, which is trivially false, for a while. I thought that finding the best flight-plan on travel agency web sites would take so long because of the "Travelling Salesman Problem", as I proudly chuckled to my relatives (when I was small, alright?!)

还能想出更多。不知道我坚持了多久。对不起。

PS: 啊，好吧，这个被清除得并不慢，但我看到新手时不时地这样做，所以我想你可能会感兴趣:我还认为要存储不确定数量的东西，你需要为每个东西声明一个新变量。所以我要创建变量a1 a2 a3…，而不是使用一个变量a，我将它声明为一个向量。

面向对象不一定比非面向对象好。

我认为OO总是更好的。然后我发现了其他技术，比如函数式编程，并意识到OO并不总是更好。