|
Colin Davies wrote:
to add in a far more easier pre-refactoring system
I like that idea. You know what I'm going to say it makes me think of! But, what does this mean to you? What is a "pre-refactored" system? How would it work?
Marc
Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
Microsoft deliberately adds arbitrary layers of complexity to make it difficult to deliver Windows features on non-Windows platforms--Microsoft's "Halloween files"
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote:
I like that idea. You know what I'm going to say it makes me think of! But, what does this mean to you? What is a "pre-refactored" system? How would it work?
OK, I admit I just made up the term pre-refactored system.
But what I am trying to stress is a way that we design the inital code so it will be easier to maintain in the future.
Maintenance normally involves
1. Fixing Bugs
2. Making te app run on a different or upgraded OS etc.
3. Adding features.
I thought COM was great because you could isolate a particular issue to one component in a lot of cases.
I don't know what the hell you do with the .NET stuff though.
If we could cut down the amount of maintenance needed on a project our productivity could multiply by several factors.
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use.
It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Davies wrote:
I don't know what the hell you do with the .NET stuff though.
Well, there's the concept of an assembly (an obfuscation of the hated DLL). Then there's reflection, which is cool, because the program can ask itself questions about its own structure and methods, and there's metadata, again which the program can use to extract programmer-supplied information about a method. All of which, I think, needs to be explored a lot more before I'll buy into the theory that a programming language can actually improve productivity (well, OK, I'll concede that point when comparing things like BASIC vs. C++).
And I don't think there's a really good understanding of design patterns or what things like AOSD and Agile Programming are really trying to point out and solve. Of course, they all seem to get mired in their own muck pretty quickly, it seems. Why is it that a good ideas are so poorly implemented?
Marc
Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
Microsoft deliberately adds arbitrary layers of complexity to make it difficult to deliver Windows features on non-Windows platforms--Microsoft's "Halloween files"
|
|
|
|
|
The most frustrating part of maintenance for me is when the powers-that-be insist on forcing feature after feature into a product that simply wasn't architected for it. A good example is an OS/2 device driver (don't ask) I wrote about 5 years ago. I'm still maintaining the ugly bugger. Its first release was around 8,000 lines of assembly language. It's now at ~18,000 lines. It includes three major custom features (each of which is mutually exclusive to the other) and dozens of minor ones. It adapts to four different versions of hardware.
For the last couple of years, I've developed a litany when the feature zombies (also known as Marketing) shamble into my cube: "Adding-this-will-destabilize-the-product-and-cause-us-more-support-calls-now-what-do-you-want?"
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote:
The most frustrating part of maintenance for me is when the powers-that-be insist on forcing feature after feature into a product that simply wasn't architected for it.
This happened to me once (note once!). I wrote the PC side of a video surveillance over phone line system, for up to 16 cameras using a single phone line. I was then asked to expand the product to support up to four different incoming lines in any combination (PSTN, ISDN, leased, RS-232). I tried explaining to the higher-ups that since the product didn't have this requirement in its original spec/design, it would basically be a rewrite. They were none too pleased.
And neither was I, frankly. This was my first real OO app, and I was under the assumption that what they said about OO, being flexible, having reusable components, all that inheritence stuff, would mean my application would be extensible. Plus, this was a DOS product, how difficult can it get?
Well, it wasn't, because a language doesn't provide for flexibility. You need the right kind of framework, regardless of whether the language is OO or assembly. And it requires a designer that understands how to properly abstract what are otherwise hard physical constructs that are hard wired into the code.
Well, I became that designer after this rude awakening, and the framework I now use is my AAL. (you have seen the articles, right???  ) I've usually have long term relationships with my clients, and THEY have some very interesting clients, so major feature creep is something that I have to ensure is supported by my applications. And I mean, MAJOR. What's interesting is that most of the enhancements I've had to make affect the GUI, the database model, and the scripts that feed the GUI-database and the database-application code. Very little application code changes have been necessary, and some general framework/library enhancements along the way. In fact, one application (boat yard management system) is entirely written in scripts. There's not a single application specific line of C++ code. Very easy to maintain and add features to.
Marc
Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
Microsoft deliberately adds arbitrary layers of complexity to make it difficult to deliver Windows features on non-Windows platforms--Microsoft's "Halloween files"
|
|
|
|
|
The old saying:
Live and learn.
Don't and die.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not even doing them myself. The problem is to get this information from our people. 
Most of the requirement are very poor, and the give us something that is more part of the design (a few screen shots) than proper requirements. 
And the planning is hard to get as well. The keep adding and changing stuff without really thinking about any change in theplanning. But I guess there's nothing new here. 
Elrond
Don't be dismayed at goodbyes. A farewell is necessary before you can meet again. And meeting again, after moments or lifetimes is certain for thoes who are friends."
Richard Bach, Illusions
|
|
|
|
|
When a new system is going to be developed, the people to whom it is intended (and sometimes are the people that don´t even know how to turn the computer on) don´t bother to think of what they really need, so we have to investigate and figure out how the system could help them. But then, when the system is ready for testing, there comes that old "it is not quite what I had in mind..." 
|
|
|
|
|
How can anyone find development more stressful than design, testing, marketing, deployment etc etc?
Maybe they're in the wrong job...
|
|
|
|
|
During development, all my promises and estimates are put under the spotlight. And all my client's promises and estimates too. Design never manages to unearth all the nasty stuff, because after all, everyone has been ignoring it (the nasties) for years, why start now? And I can talk till I'm blue about up front design, but clients want product, not hand waving. Development usually brings out all the screw ups. Very stressful. But not as stressful as maintenance, for me at least.
Marc
Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
Microsoft deliberately adds arbitrary layers of complexity to make it difficult to deliver Windows features on non-Windows platforms--Microsoft's "Halloween files"
|
|
|
|
|
Does not make sense to me either. Development brings all problems to the surface, but problem solving and challenge is what the programming is all about, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
As Marc said development is when all the real problems occur, you realize that there are gaps in your design, you can plan for everything and still face problems when you develop, it's not that i don't like solving problems but when you are running on a tight schedule it does create a lot of stress when you get stuck 
So yes development is the most stressful part for me although not the one i like the least.
I always think that the idea of a compiler that compiles another compiler or itself is rather incestuous in a binary way. - Colin Davies
My .Net Blog
|
|
|
|
|
The 'last' bug. It is usually not too bad but you are so stressed about doing enough regression testing etc 
Davy
Blog for Software Testing, Bugs, Quality, Security and Stability - www.latedecember.com
News From Scotland - The Angus Blog and The Dundee Blog
My Personal Blog - Homepage.
|
|
|
|
|
Is that to say that you always get all the bugs out????
Regards,
Brian Dela
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, there is no such thing as the last bug...there is only the last bug you have found. 
Gary Kirkham
A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs
I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
