I think as a software designer or it is IT practitioner, and I have my own ideas is a very good thing.
Really confused? Really. I think an junior high school will definitely not be confused. Because he knows too little. An expert will not be confused, because he knows that he feels enough, he already has his own words. And I am very unfortunate, it is between junior high school students and experts, knowing a little bit, but it is not very clear.
Dr. Yao Hong's "Java and Model" is really good, a bit new, unfortunately, he can't escape. If he can write this book into the classic classic, I think it should be bigger. It is a pity that people live in this world, no matter how they can't open their utilitarian. I think I am the same. More and more powerful, more and more vulgar. I don't want to be like this. Why? I used to always feel perfect. I think a person is not a good person is a bad person, not a friend is an enemy. Slowly, in this society for a long time, heart gray. I now think everyone has freedom of his own choice. As long as he does not take the interest of others, then, no matter how he pursues his own interests, he should be able to be called a good person. So I can accept it for the deletion of the people in the bridge. ... But the bridge is not very well understood by the article written in this article, this is a little misunderstood ... I hope I will not turn into it. That ... but what he walks, I like it very much, because I don't know if he is this person, I have the idea of walking his road. When I think, he has already done it. Therefore, it is worthy of I admire.
I think your point of view is aged (represented by Martin Flower et al., I really like it, but he still can't understand it, so I didn't care, I estimate that your skills in this area. It should be very strong, ^ _ ^) has a big impact. I am more appreciating your point of view in this process of complexity, scalability, maintainability, performance, cost, and construction period. As for the system soul, I think it should be changed under different system environment and visual. Excessively emphasize business needs or techniques have a loss.
On the framework, I think your views and physical philosophical principles are very similar. My point is that the selection of the framework is affected by system resources (such as resources such as talents in this area). I think the current frame is in the Spring and Autumn Warring States Period (each of the respective advantages and disadvantages, at least have not made me feel very cool), I am looking forward to the emergence of powerful Qin State. After a hundred flowers, there should be a peony in the city.
In this sense, I may be more important than you to develop a framework. I think the idea of the business frame you mentioned is very good, but it is difficult to achieve. 1) There must be a rich knowledge of a certain industry. It is a professional expert in a certain industry. 2) There is no common, or it is difficult to have a relatively universal business framework. The business framework is generally specific to a certain field. 3) If the business framework is impossible or it is difficult to customize some system analysts, field experts, and programmers. The formation of the business frame is dependent on the entire industry. Just like Java Group to develop Java-related specifications. The MDA method of the OMG organization is a higher level of abstraction. The model modeling is also difficult for the MDA method, as needed to define a field-related language. UML is a universal modeling language, it is difficult to compete.
Let me state my own point of view. I think the research direction of software development is not more than the following points: 1 methodology. I think it is undoubtedly the mainstream position in the field of software development, is still an object-oriented software development method. AOP, FOP, TMD, ... are all supplemented by OO methods.
2 Process. RUP, CMM? ......
3 Auxiliary tools A unique development method and a mature process must have a auxiliary tool that is adapted to
1, 2 is standing in a relatively high abstract visual problem. Limited to our knowledge and experience, I think we should be impossible to this. Here, too academic, so there is no space. Ranking in investment, tract time. 3 The abstraction of the abstraction is more than 1, 2, and the ordinary developers can pour carefully. And what I said, including development framework, IDE.
About setting a software studio goals and directions
The target is divided into short-term goals and short-term goals: development and maintenance of a sufficiently complex system. For example, my KRS system. Of course, it can be other systems. Abstract some reusable elements in practice. It is necessary to know that all models are from practice. "Looking for the complexity, scalability, maintenance, performance, cost and construction period of" in this process. " Long-term: Maintain a development framework, stick to KISS (Keep IT Simple and Stupid, Not Keep Itshort, Stupid! ^ _ ^) Principles. Appreciate "Moon Myth". Not because "programmers are like poets, almost almost in pure thinking". "No silver" or is truth. Perfect is an ideal state, may never arrive. But this will not be our lazy excuse. The principles of software design should be simple and beautiful aesthetic principles.
The software studio does not have to have a substance, I think the biggest shortcomings of programmers are missing communication. The great ideas tend to exchange. If our software studio can wipe out the thoughts, it is already very grades. So I hope everyone can speak freely. I don't think there is no point of view. It is ridiculous or childish. People who don't dare to think must be done.
The above is purely a personal point of view, and I hope that it can play the effect of the brick introduction.
Thanks & Regards, Narci.
