Schools of thought
From CSSEMediaWiki
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
The emergence of OO into the software mainstream was driven by [[Software reuse]], and this lead to a raft of maxims intended to encourage reusability. But reuse flopped. Today it isn't mentioned in polite company, and instead we say things like [[Do the simplest thing that could possibly work]] because [[You ain't gonna need it]]. | The emergence of OO into the software mainstream was driven by [[Software reuse]], and this lead to a raft of maxims intended to encourage reusability. But reuse flopped. Today it isn't mentioned in polite company, and instead we say things like [[Do the simplest thing that could possibly work]] because [[You ain't gonna need it]]. | ||
| − | + | In the 'Reuse' corner: | |
* [[Big design up front]] | * [[Big design up front]] | ||
* [[Software reuse]] | * [[Software reuse]] | ||
* [[Extensibility]] | * [[Extensibility]] | ||
| − | + | In the 'DTSTTCPW' corner: | |
* [[You ain't gonna need it]] | * [[You ain't gonna need it]] | ||
* [[Do the simplest thing that could possibly work]] | * [[Do the simplest thing that could possibly work]] | ||
* [[Refactoring]] | * [[Refactoring]] | ||
Revision as of 07:08, 23 July 2009
This page is an attempt to make sense of the overwhelming morass of OOD advice by identifying differences in underlying design philosophies, which lead to conflicting maxims.
Reuse vs DTSTTCPW
The emergence of OO into the software mainstream was driven by Software reuse, and this lead to a raft of maxims intended to encourage reusability. But reuse flopped. Today it isn't mentioned in polite company, and instead we say things like Do the simplest thing that could possibly work because You ain't gonna need it.
In the 'Reuse' corner:
In the 'DTSTTCPW' corner:
