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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC 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: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: harry@matilda.alt.net.au (Harry Protoolis) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/07 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202826799 references: <58aj6t$1ch@news3.digex.net> organization: alt.computer pty ltd reply-to: harry@alt.net.au newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1996-12-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On 7 Dec 1996 02:02:05 GMT, Ell wrote: >Piercarlo Grandi (pcg@aber.ac.uk) wrote: >: "rmartin" == Robert C Martin writes: >: > Harry wrote >: >> In fact IMHO an OO team has no place for anyone who cannot do all >: >> three tasks. [Analysis, Design, and Implementation] > >: > Agreed, emphatically. > >It seems you all are not considering all factors here. For instance, >because someone is a good Java programmer does not necessarily mean they >are good at working with users to formulate analysis, or that they have >good architectural skills for medium sized or large projects. And vice >versa. This is a question of direction. I accept that there will be individuals who can only do implementation under the guidance of more senior designer/implementors, and that possibly not all of your designer/implementors might do analysis. These are acceptable tradeoffs to the reality of staffing projects. However, I would never, ever, ever hire an individual who claimed to be a 'software architect' who was not *at least* a competent programmer, and I would try hard to find one who was an exceptional programmer. I would expect a person calling themselves an 'analyst' to be either a competant designer/implementor or have very strong domain specific skills, or better yet both. If they only have the latter then their role would, by necessity, be limited. >Some people are better at some things than others and some people >shouldn't do certain things at all. Sure, but IME if you can write software, you can't be an 'architect' period. >: Architecture, as you have so many times argued, is extremely important, >: and the implementor that is not guided by sound architectural >: principles, by close interaction with analisys and design, is not going >: to do a nice implementation. >If you are speaking of Martin, he has only accepted that project coders >should be required to follow architecture within the last 6 months >(partially at my urging). WRT analysis he has never to my knowledge >accepted that an overall analysis should be done at the outset of a >project and that it should lead the creation of project architecture. See, you said it again. 'project coders' as if they were a separate bunch of people. If you make the 'Architecture Team' the core of the 'Coding team' then the issue of 'requiring' does not come up. Of course the implementation will follow the architecture, if the architecture is being developed by the same people who are leading the implementation effort. H - Harry Protoolis alt.computer pty ltd harry@alt.net.au software development consultants