Comments on: Simpler for whom? http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2013/02/23/simpler-for-whom/ John D. Cook Thu, 23 May 2013 10:27:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Chris Hemedinger http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2013/02/23/simpler-for-whom/comment-page-1/#comment-850 Chris Hemedinger Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:33:36 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=13001#comment-850 I once had a colleague that made this distinction between complex and complicated — meant within the context of software design:

“Complex” can describe a system that has (perhaps necessarily) many parts with many interactions. There is nothing wrong with a complex solution when the problem domain is complex.

“Complicated” is a state that we have brought upon ourselves: taken something with few parts and few interactions and added moreto satisfy perceived edge cases or our own (over-)engineering sensibilities.

]]> By: Luke Hutchison http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2013/02/23/simpler-for-whom/comment-page-1/#comment-849 Luke Hutchison Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:57:56 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=13001#comment-849 Similarly, on the flip side, complexity is not the same thing as being complicated. The Mandelbrot set is described by a formula of low complexity, but the generated fractal is immensely (infinitely) complicated. (viz Kolmogorov complexity)

]]> By: Steve Taylor http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2013/02/23/simpler-for-whom/comment-page-1/#comment-848 Steve Taylor Mon, 25 Feb 2013 03:57:29 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=13001#comment-848 I don’t have the context, but it sure sounds like sarcasm to me!

]]>