Refactoring, design patterns are considered to be the classic of software design. I haven't finished reading two books. On the one hand, the reason is time, on the other hand, I think it needs to be jumped out of breath. Every time a Chinese teacher is in the layout title, it will not explain the title clearly. He thinks that the more clearly explained that everyone's thinking is a tight. This is the reason I have to gas, the more clear the book, the easier it is, the easier directly use the conclusions, but you can't learn the real thing. Jumping out and thinking about it, get more. I tried to adjust the eyes and see these two books. I thought of the two concepts in history: "Revolution" and "Improvement". "Revolution" is the foundation of the current foundation, and the way to take is a big knife. Don't overthrow now The foundation, think it is too fierce, the way to take is progressive. Reconstructive thinking is not the idea of "modifying"? But in the field of software design, there is no "revolutionist" that is relatively anti-anti-fight. Already have someone in silence? Some people put the design pattern than to do the formation of Go. So, we seem to have such a conclusion: master all the contents of the two books do not necessarily understand design. Because if the design is better than the layout in Go, the design mode is in the statter, and the reconstruction can think that it is a regret. A person who only regrets chess and styles is not good. Recruped is really as good, but just a regret. The design pattern is really as good, but it is just a formation. The real design classic has not yet appeared. Comprehensive description The theory has not yet appeared. Can the Chinese can't write such a book? Article Source: http://www.yxblog.com
