From this debate in the TADS category
Aside the creative process of Jbg, the concept “breadth-first vs. depth-first” is worth of general debate, at least IMVHO.
The concept is often applied in designing & implementing map layouts, either first drafting the entire maps or major regions, then detailing the rooms and populating them with items, puzzles or NPC (breadth-first) or doing one (or more) rooms at time, but fully implemented (depth-first), and there was already debates on merits (and demerits) of the two concept in map building.
But the concept isn’t limited to maps; can apply to all major components of an IF (ex. items/things, verbs & vocabulary, NPCs, daemons & fuzes, even puzzles).
For example, one can implement a set of verbs with only the default stock response (e.g. “you verb the item without results” or like) then implement the responses, special cases &c one by one, or fully implement one verb at time)
Personally, I apply the “breadth-first” concept to maps and the “depth-first” to verbs. But the point to debate should be the application of this pair of concept to the diverse components of an IF, not necessarily limited to the major ones cited above.
I think that will be an interesting and inspiring debate…
Best regards from Italy,