Welcome to the Lounge

honey the codewitch wrote:

I don't know why I like coding in constrained environments so much

Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.

honey the codewitch wrote:

don't know why I like coding in constrained environments so much

0x01AA wrote:

Ray Charles - Hit the Road Jack

Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.

honey the codewitch wrote:

I thought there would be a lot more UML involved, but I'm glad there wasn't

Greg Utas wrote:

The folks who first documented software patterns were very influenced by the writings of Christopher Alexander

Quote:

The term “architect” as used in software was not popularized until the early 1990s. Perhaps the first suggestion that there would be anything for software practitioners to learn from architects came in that NATO Software Engineering conference in Germany in 1968, from Peter Naur:

Software designers are in a similar position to architects and civil engineers, particularly those concerned with the design of large heterogeneous constructions, such as towns and industrial plants. It therefore seems natural that we should turn to these subjects for ideas about how to attack the design problem. As one single example of such a source of ideas, I would like to mention: Christopher Alexander: Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Harvard Univ. Press, 1964) (emphasis mine).

This, and other statements from the elder statesmen of our field at this conference in 1968, are the progenitors of how we thought we should think about software design. The problem with Naur’s statement is obvious: it’s simply false. It’s also unsupported. To state that we’re in a “similar position to architects” has no more bearing logically, or truthfully, to stating that we’re in a similar position to, say, philosophy professors, or writers, or aviators, or bureaucrats, or rugby players, or bunnies, or ponies. An argument by analogy is always false. Here, no argument is even given. Yet here this idea took hold, the participants returning to their native lands around the world, writing and teaching and mentoring for decades, shaping our entire field. This now haunts and silently shapes—perhaps even circumscribes and mentally constrains, however artificially—how we conduct our work, how we think about it, what we “know” we do.

Greg Utas wrote:

When the importance of software excellence is poorly understood and rewarded, the company fails to develop or retain software architects and ends up paying the price.

Red Adair said

If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.

Greg Utas wrote:

I'm curious why the author harps on the use of architect. He says it "haunts" how we conduct our work, so he must have some opinions on how our work would be better conducted.