From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 11cae8,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid11cae8,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: rmartin@oma.com (Robert C. Martin) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/04 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202309310 references: <32A4659D.347A@shef.ac.uk> organization: Object Mentor Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lnag.java,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1996-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , harry@matilda.alt.net.au (Harry Protoolis) wrote: > The traditional techniques all suffered from a number of significant > flaws. Perhaps the most damaging one was what I (rather unkindly) think > of as 'The glorification of idiots' phenomenon. What I mean by this is > that projects were typically infested by a group of people who never > wrote any software, but spent most of the budget drawing diagrams that > the implementors never used. Much to my dismay, there are some OO methods that are promoting the same scheme. The "analyst" draw nice pretty little diagrams, and even run them through simulators to "prove" that they work. These diagrams are then run through a program that generates code. Programmers who maintain that code generator have to make sure that the "right" code is generated. They have to make the program work. In another case, I have worked with a client who had a bunch of "architects" doing nothing but drawing pretty Booch diagrams and then throwing them over the wall to a bunch of programmers. The programmers hated the architects and ignored what they produced. > > In fact IMHO an OO team has no place for anyone who cannot do all > three tasks. [Analysis, Design, and Implementation] Agreed, emphatically. > Jim Coplein wrote an excellent pattern called > 'Architect also Implements' which covers very nicely the reasoning > behind not allowing non-implementors to design systems. Software architects who do not implement will be ignored by the people who actually *do* implement. An architect cannot be effective unless he/she really understands the problems that the implementors are facing today, now, this minute. -- Robert C. Martin | Design Consulting | Training courses offered: Object Mentor | rmartin@oma.com | Object Oriented Design 14619 N Somerset Cr | Tel: (847) 918-1004 | C++ Green Oaks IL 60048 | Fax: (847) 918-1023 | http://www.oma.com "One of the great commandments of science is: 'Mistrust arguments from authority.'" -- Carl Sagan