Brick * XP * Simple Design
Frankcai @ freecity (frankcai_zju @ 9cbs) Attended in the Computer College of Zhejiang University, it is relatively wide. He has been engaged in software development at the Embedded System Laboratory of Zhejiang University. Financial projects.
Throw the bricks first, the big cows are more jade, it seems that the XP claims simple design, in Extreme Programming Explained, the reason is that the cost of conventional software projects believes that the cost payable changes over time. XP believes that this theorem has not been established during the modern software development process, because the method of object-oriented software design methods and design patterns can be used, I think this should be unlikely? Even the object-oriented, even a good mode of use, can this most be able to calm down to change to a certain extent? If it is too big, how can it be an object? I don't know what is actually? However, I still have a very agreed design because since the demand always changes, we can't truly capture the demand in the beginning, with it to spend a lot of time in the design, implementation, testing of those mistakes. It's better to start, put the core, the most impossible change, and then use it to capture the demand, modify it, maybe we will spend a lot of time at this time, but actually in front of us It has been a lot of time, and in general, we waste more time in error needs, and save more time, this may also be said to be a prototype method. In addition, when the technical risk is relatively large, (for example, our students do things with new learning things) have started too much consideration, trying to get all the problems, often reduce efficiency, such as a little better, Of course, this is in the case of the overall structure. (This is my own actual experience :) The above, the princes are laughing.
