|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: Marco Bertschi wrote: every time you stop working, so there must be at least two or three such parties a day.
And your point is? 
Just wanted to pint that out
|
|
|
|
|
Well I'm not going if I can't bring the wife!
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
|
|
|
|
|
Ya beat me to it. 
|
|
|
|
|
So...
1. Dance.
2. Drink too much.
3. *Something* with a sheep.
4. Step 3 resulting in baby Bob.
Well if it works for you who am I to judge.
|
|
|
|
|
Right at the bottom:
(o) Getting the invoice paid.
The universe is composed of electrons, neutrons, protons and......morons. (ThePhantomUpvoter)
|
|
|
|
|
IMO it is the most important phase of the development process:
If you fcuk things up here, writing code, fixing bugs and adding new features becomes a major royal PITA.
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more. You'd never dream of building a house without architectural designs. Why should software development be any different?
I'm not a man to idly tell people "I told you so", but I'm sorely tempted when the team next door spend several man-days involving the whole team in a discussion about "where this interface should go" in a 100+ project solution. If your solution has 100+ projects and you haven't already visualised your packages and dependencies, you are TRWTF. Never mind the fact that you should have started by visualising your solution structure before you even touched Visual Studio. You'd be able to do away with all "refactoring sprints".
I've been around a fair while and no matter where I go, be it a Fortune 500 company or a brand new startup in someone's spare room: in 13 years I've never seen a development process that devotes adequate time, knowledge and resources to software architecture and design. everywhere you go people cut corners or are so hubris-ridden that they think they're above any WTF and the worst thing is, nobody learns.
|
|
|
|
|
jim lahey wrote: Why should software development be any different?
Because software is soft - it is much harder to alter a building after its been constructed.
I do agree with having software architecture, but the analogies with building and engineering don't cut it as a justification. We need to come up with justifications that apply to software itself.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Grainger wrote: Because software is soft - it is much harder to alter a building after its been constructed.
Physically harder, indeed. But then again: Moving things around and adding/deleting features in software is much easier when the data access does not do any UI operations (and the UI does not access the database without the dataaccess), eh?
|
|
|
|
|
That's where the actual logic get built.
That's where the methods and everything you have learned get applied. (Commenting code, naming conventions etc.)
That's the part from where KT is needed; and if it built perfectly then project will be live always no matter how many people will work on it.
I always love to be core part of actual coding and building logic.
|
|
|
|
|
I think I like this the best because it happens so rarely!! 
|
|
|
|
|
Because it fun,challenge,pain,work and everything..
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
