Search Results

Search found 38 results on 2 pages for 'cohesion'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • What is logical cohesion, and why is it bad or undesirable?

    - by Matt Fenwick
    From the c2wiki page on coupling & cohesion: Cohesion (interdependency within module) strength/level names : (from worse to better, high cohesion is good) Coincidental Cohesion : (Worst) Module elements are unrelated Logical Cohesion : Elements perform similar activities as selected from outside module, i.e. by a flag that selects operation to perform (see also CommandObject). i.e. body of function is one huge if-else/switch on operation flag Temporal Cohesion : operations related only by general time performed (i.e. initialization() or FatalErrorShutdown?()) Procedural Cohesion : Elements involved in different but sequential activities, each on different data (usually could be trivially split into multiple modules along linear sequence boundaries) Communicational Cohesion : unrelated operations except need same data or input Sequential Cohesion : operations on same data in significant order; output from one function is input to next (pipeline) Informational Cohesion: a module performs a number of actions, each with its own entry point, with independent code for each action, all performed on the same data structure. Essentially an implementation of an abstract data type. i.e. define structure of sales_region_table and its operators: init_table(), update_table(), print_table() Functional Cohesion : all elements contribute to a single, well-defined task, i.e. a function that performs exactly one operation get_engine_temperature(), add_sales_tax() (emphasis mine). I don't fully understand the definition of logical cohesion. My questions are: what is logical cohesion? Why does it get such a bad rap (2nd worst kind of cohesion)?

    Read the article

  • What is the meaning of 'high cohesion'?

    - by Max
    I am a student who recently joined a software development company as an intern. Back at the university, one of my professors used to say that we have to strive to achieve "Low coupling and high cohesion". I understand the meaning of low coupling. It means to keep the code of separate components separately, so that a change in one place does not break the code in another. But what is meant by high cohesion. If it means integrating the various pieces of the same component well with each other, I dont understand how that becomes advantageous. What is meant by high cohesion? Can an example be explained to understand its benefits?

    Read the article

  • Cohesion and Decoupling.

    - by dbtek
    Can anyone tell me what are Cohesion and Decoupling? I found coupling but there is no Decoupling anywhere. I need to learn their meanings. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks for replying.

    Read the article

  • Coupling/Cohesion

    - by user559142
    Hi All, Whilst there are many good examples on this forum that contain examples of coupling and cohesion, I am struggling to apply it to my code fully. I can identify parts in my code that may need changing. Would any Java experts be able to take a look at my code and explain to me what aspects are good and bad. I don't mind changing it myself at all. It's just that many people seem to disagree with each other and I'm finding it hard to actually understand what principles to follow... package familytree; /** * * @author David */ public class Main { /** * @param args the command line arguments */ public static void main(String[] args) { // TODO code application logic here KeyboardInput in = new KeyboardInput(); FamilyTree familyTree = new FamilyTree(in, System.out); familyTree.start(); } } package familytree; import java.io.PrintStream; /** * * @author David */ public class FamilyTree { /** * @param args the command line arguments */ private static final int DISPLAY_FAMILY_MEMBERS = 1; private static final int ADD_FAMILY_MEMBER = 2; private static final int REMOVE_FAMILY_MEMBER = 3; private static final int EDIT_FAMILY_MEMBER = 4; private static final int SAVE_FAMILY_TREE = 5; private static final int LOAD_FAMILY_TREE = 6; private static final int DISPLAY_ANCESTORS = 7; private static final int DISPLAY_DESCENDANTS = 8; private static final int QUIT = 9; private KeyboardInput in; private Family family; private PrintStream out; public FamilyTree(KeyboardInput in, PrintStream out) { this.in = in; this.out = out; family = new Family(); } public void start() { out.println("\nWelcome to the Family Tree Builder"); //enterUserDetails(); initialise(); while (true) { displayFamilyTreeMenu(); out.print("\nEnter Choice: "); int option = in.readInteger(); if (option > 0 && option <= 8) { if (quit(option)) { break; } executeOption(option); } else { out.println("Invalid Choice!"); } } } //good private void displayFamilyTreeMenu() { out.println("\nFamily Tree Menu"); out.println(DISPLAY_FAMILY_MEMBERS + ". Display Family Members"); out.println(ADD_FAMILY_MEMBER + ". Add Family Member"); out.println(REMOVE_FAMILY_MEMBER + ". Remove Family Member"); out.println(EDIT_FAMILY_MEMBER + ". Edit Family Member"); out.println(SAVE_FAMILY_TREE + ". Save Family Tree"); out.println(LOAD_FAMILY_TREE + ". Load Family Tree"); out.println(DISPLAY_ANCESTORS + ". Display Ancestors"); out.println(DISPLAY_DESCENDANTS + ". Display Descendants"); out.println(QUIT + ". Quit"); } //good private boolean quit(int opt) { return (opt == QUIT) ? true : false; } //good private void executeOption(int choice) { switch (choice) { case DISPLAY_FAMILY_MEMBERS: displayFamilyMembers(); break; case ADD_FAMILY_MEMBER: addFamilyMember(); break; case REMOVE_FAMILY_MEMBER: break; case EDIT_FAMILY_MEMBER: break; case SAVE_FAMILY_TREE: break; case LOAD_FAMILY_TREE: break; case DISPLAY_ANCESTORS: displayAncestors(); break; case DISPLAY_DESCENDANTS: displayDescendants(); break; default: out.println("Not a valid option! Try again."); break; } } //for selecting family member for editing adding nodes etc private void displayFamilyMembers() { out.println("\nDisplay Family Members"); int count = 0; for (FamilyMember member : family.getFamilyMembers()) { out.println(); if (count + 1 < 10) { out.println((count + 1) + ". " + member.getFirstName() + " " + member.getLastName()); out.println(" " + member.getDob()); out.println(" Generation: " + member.getGeneration()); } else { out.println((count + 1) + ". " + member.getFirstName() + " " + member.getLastName()); out.println(" " + member.getDob()); out.println(" Generation: " + member.getGeneration()); } count++; } } private int selectRelative() { out.println("\nSelect Relative"); out.println("1. Add Parents"); out.println("2. Add Child"); out.println("3. Add Partner"); out.println("4. Add Sibling"); out.print("\nEnter Choice: "); int choice = in.readInteger(); if (choice > 0 && choice < 5) { return choice; } return (-1); } private void addFamilyMember() { int memberIndex = selectMember(); if (memberIndex >= 0) { FamilyMember member = family.getFamilyMember(memberIndex); int relative = selectRelative(); if (relative > 0) { out.println("\nAdd Member"); //if choice is valid switch (relative) { case 1: //adding parents if (member.getFather() == null) { FamilyMember mum, dad; out.println("Enter Mothers Details"); mum = addMember(relative, "Female"); out.println("\nEnter Fathers Details"); dad = addMember(relative, "Male"); member.linkParent(mum); member.linkParent(dad); mum.linkPartner(dad); mum.setGeneration(member.getGeneration() - 1); dad.setGeneration(member.getGeneration() - 1); sortGenerations(); } else { out.println(member.getFirstName() + " " + member.getLastName() + " already has parents."); } break; case 2: //adding child if (member.getPartner() == null) { FamilyMember partner; if (member.getGender().equals("Male")) { out.println("Enter Mothers Details"); partner = addMember(1, "Female"); } else { out.println("Enter Fathers Details"); partner = addMember(1, "Male"); } //create partner member.linkPartner(partner); partner.setGeneration(member.getGeneration()); out.println(); } out.println("Enter Childs Details"); FamilyMember child = addMember(relative, ""); child.linkParent(member); child.linkParent(member.getPartner()); child.setGeneration(member.getGeneration() + 1); sortGenerations(); break; case 3: //adding partner if (member.getPartner() == null) { out.println("Enter Partners Details"); FamilyMember partner = addMember(relative, ""); member.linkPartner(partner); partner.setGeneration(member.getGeneration()); } else { out.println(member.getFirstName() + " " + member.getLastName() + " already has a partner."); } break; case 4: //adding sibling FamilyMember mum, dad; if (member.getFather() == null) { out.println("Enter Mothers Details"); mum = addMember(1, "Female"); out.println("\nEnter Fathers Details"); dad = addMember(1, "Male"); member.linkParent(mum); member.linkParent(dad); mum.linkPartner(dad); mum.setGeneration(member.getGeneration() - 1); dad.setGeneration(member.getGeneration() - 1); sortGenerations(); out.println("\nEnter Siblings Details"); } else { out.println("Enter Siblings Details"); } FamilyMember sibling = addMember(relative, ""); //create mum and dad mum = member.getMother(); dad = member.getFather(); sibling.linkParent(mum); sibling.linkParent(dad); sibling.setGeneration(member.getGeneration()); break; } } else { out.println("Invalid Option!"); } } else { out.println("Invalid Option!"); } } private int selectMember() { displayFamilyMembers(); out.print("\nSelect Member: "); int choice = in.readInteger(); if (choice > 0 && choice <= family.getFamilyMembers().size()) { return (choice - 1); } return -1; } private FamilyMember addMember(int option, String gender) { out.print("Enter First Name: "); String fName = formatString(in.readString().trim()); out.print("Enter Last Name: "); String lName = formatString(in.readString().trim()); if (option != 1) { //if not adding parents out.println("Select Gender"); out.println("1. Male"); out.println("2. Female"); out.print("Enter Choice: "); int gOpt = in.readInteger(); if (gOpt == 1) { gender = "Male"; } else if (gOpt == 2) { gender = "Female"; } else { out.println("Invalid Choice"); return null; } } String dob = enterDateOfBirth(); lName = formatString(lName); FamilyMember f = family.getFamilyMember(family.addMember(fName, lName, gender, dob)); f.setIndex(family.getFamilyMembers().size() - 1); return (f); } private String formatString(String s){ String firstLetter = s.substring(0, 1); String remainingLetters = s.substring(1, s.length()); s = firstLetter.toUpperCase() + remainingLetters.toLowerCase(); return s; } private String enterDateOfBirth(){ out.print("Enter Year Of Birth (0 - 2011): "); String y = in.readString(); out.print("Enter Month Of Birth (1-12): "); String m = in.readString(); if (Integer.parseInt(m) < 10) { m = "0" + m; } m += "-"; out.print("Enter Date of Birth (1-31): "); String d = in.readString(); if (Integer.parseInt(d) < 10) { d = "0" + d; } d += "-"; String dob = d + m + y; while(!DateValidator.isValid(dob)){ out.println("Invalid Date. Try Again:"); dob = enterDateOfBirth(); } return (dob); } private void displayAncestors() { out.print("\nDisplay Ancestors For Which Member: "); int choice = selectMember(); if (choice >= 0) { FamilyMember node = family.getFamilyMember(choice ); FamilyMember ms = findRootNode(node, 0, 2, -1); FamilyMember fs = findRootNode(node, 1, 2, -1); out.println("\nPrint Ancestors"); out.println("\nMothers Side"); printDescendants(ms, node, ms.getGeneration()); out.println("\nFathers Side"); printDescendants(fs, node, fs.getGeneration()); } else { out.println("Invalid Option!"); } } private void displayDescendants() { out.print("\nDisplay Descendants For Which Member: "); int choice = selectMember(); if (choice >= 0) { FamilyMember node = family.getFamilyMember(choice); out.println("\nPrint Descendants"); printDescendants(node, null, 0); } else { out.println("Invalid Option!"); } } private FamilyMember findRootNode(FamilyMember node, int parent, int numGenerations, int count) { FamilyMember root; count++; if (node.hasParents() && count < numGenerations) { if (parent == 0) { node = node.getMother(); root = findRootNode(node, 1, numGenerations, count); } else { node = node.getFather(); root = findRootNode(node, 1, numGenerations, count); } return root; } return node; } private int findHighestLeafGeneration(FamilyMember node) { int gen = node.getGeneration(); for (int i = 0; i < node.getChildren().size(); i++) { int highestChild = findHighestLeafGeneration(node.getChild(i)); if (highestChild > gen) { gen = highestChild; } } return gen; } private void printDescendants(FamilyMember root, FamilyMember node, int gen) { out.print((root.getGeneration() + 1) + " " + root.getFullName()); out.print(" [" + root.getDob() + "] "); if (root.getPartner() != null) { out.print("+Partner: " + root.getPartner().getFullName() + " [" + root.getPartner().getDob() + "] "); } if (root == node) { out.print("*"); } out.println(); if (!root.getChildren().isEmpty() && root != node) { for (int i = 0; i < root.getChildren().size(); i++) { for (int j = 0; j < root.getChild(i).getGeneration() - gen; j++) { out.print(" "); } printDescendants(root.getChild(i), node, gen); } } else { return; } } //retrieve highest generation public int getRootGeneration(){ int min = family.getFamilyMember(0).getGeneration(); for(int i = 0; i < family.getFamilyMembers().size(); i++){ min = Math.min(min, family.getFamilyMember(i).getGeneration()); } return Math.abs(min); } public void sortGenerations(){ int amount = getRootGeneration(); for (FamilyMember member : family.getFamilyMembers()) { member.setGeneration(member.getGeneration() + amount); } } //test method - temporary private void initialise() { family.addMember("Bilbo", "Baggins", "Male", "23-06-1920"); } } package familytree; import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.Date; /** * * @author David */ public class Family { //family members private ArrayList<FamilyMember> family; //create Family public Family() { family = new ArrayList<FamilyMember>(); } //add member to the family public int addMember(String f, String l, String g, String d) { family.add(new FamilyMember(f, l, g, d)); return family.size()-1; } //remove member from family public void removeMember(int index) { family.remove(index); } public FamilyMember getFamilyMember(int index) { return family.get(index); } //return family public ArrayList <FamilyMember> getFamilyMembers() { return family; } public void changeFirstName(int index, String f) { family.get(index).setFirstName(f);//change to setfirstname and others } public void changeLastName(int index, String l) { family.get(index).setLastName(l); } public void changeAge(int index, int a) { family.get(index).setAge(a); } public void changeDOB() { //implement } } package familytree; import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.Collections; /** * * @author David */ public class FamilyMember extends Person { private FamilyMember mother; private FamilyMember father; private FamilyMember partner; private ArrayList<FamilyMember> children; private int generation; private int index; //initialise family member public FamilyMember(String f, String l, String g, String d) { super(f, l, g, d); mother = null; father = null; partner = null; children = new ArrayList<FamilyMember>(); generation = 0; index = -1; } public void linkParent(FamilyMember parent) { if (parent.getGender().equals("Female")) { this.setMother(parent); } else { this.setFather(parent); } parent.addChild(this); } public void linkPartner(FamilyMember partner) { partner.setPartner(this); this.setPartner(partner); } public boolean hasParents() { if (this.getMother() == null && this.getFather() == null) { return false; } return true; } public FamilyMember getMother() { return mother; } public FamilyMember getFather() { return father; } public FamilyMember getPartner() { return partner; } public FamilyMember getChild(int index) { return children.get(index); } public int getGeneration() { return generation; } public int getIndex() { return index; } public ArrayList<FamilyMember> getChildren() { return children; } public void setMother(FamilyMember f) { mother = f; } public void setFather(FamilyMember f) { father = f; } public void setPartner(FamilyMember f) { partner = f; } public void addChild(FamilyMember f) { children.add(f); //add child if(children.size() > 1){ //sort in ascending order Collections.sort(children, new DateComparator()); } } public void addChildAt(FamilyMember f, int index) { children.set(index, f); } public void setGeneration(int g) { generation = g; } public void setIndex(int i){ index = i; } } package familytree; /** * * @author David */ public class Person{ private String fName; private String lName; private String gender; private int age; private String dob; public Person(String fName, String lName, String gender, String dob){ this.fName = fName; this.lName = lName; this.gender = gender; this.dob = dob; } public String getFullName(){ return (this.fName + " " + this.lName); } public String getFirstName(){ return (fName); } public String getLastName(){ return (lName); } public String getGender(){ return (gender); } public String getDob(){ return dob; } public int getAge(){ return age; } public void setFirstName(String fName){ this.fName = fName; } public void setLastName(String lName){ this.lName = lName; } public void setGender(String gender){ this.gender = gender; } public void setAge(int age){ this.age = age; } }

    Read the article

  • Low coupling and tight cohesion

    - by hidayat
    Of course it depends on the situation. But when a lower lever object or system communicate with an higher level system, should callbacks or events be preferred to keeping a pointer to higher level object? For example, we have a world class that has a member variable vector<monster> monsters. When the monster class is going to communicate with the world class, should I prefer using a callback function then or should I have a pointer to the world class inside the monster class?

    Read the article

  • Testing a codebase with sequential cohesion

    - by iveqy
    I've this really simple program written in C with ncurses that's basically a front-end to sqlite3. I would like to implement TDD to continue the development and have found a nice C unit framework for this. However I'm totally stuck on how to implement it. Take this case for example: A user types a letter 'l' that is captured by ncurses getch(), and then an sqlite3 query is run that for every row calls a callback function. This callback function prints stuff to the screen via ncurses. So the obvious way to fully test this is to simulate a keyboard and a terminal and make sure that the output is the expected. However this sounds too complicated. I was thinking about adding an abstraction layer between the database and the UI so that the callback function will populate a list of entries and that list will later be printed. In that case I would be able to check if that list contains the expected values. However, why would I struggle with a data structure and lists in my program when sqlite3 already does this? For example, if the user wants to see the list sorted in some other way, it would be expensive to throw away the list and repopulate it. I would need to sort the list, but why should I implement sorting when sqlite3 already has that? Using my orginal design I could just do an other query sorted differently. Previously I've only done TDD with command line applications, and there it's really easy to just compare the output with what I'm expected. An other way would be to add CLI interface to the program and wrap a test program around the CLI to test everything. (The way git.git does with it's test-framework). So the question is, how to add testing to a tightly integrated database/UI.

    Read the article

  • What is the evidence that an API has exceeded its orthogonality in the context of types?

    - by hawkeye
    Wikipedia defines software orthogonality as: orthogonality in a programming language means that a relatively small set of primitive constructs can be combined in a relatively small number of ways to build the control and data structures of the language. The term is most-frequently used regarding assembly instruction sets, as orthogonal instruction set. Jason Coffin has defined software orthogonality as Highly cohesive components that are loosely coupled to each other produce an orthogonal system. C.Ross has defined software orthogonality as: the property that means "Changing A does not change B". An example of an orthogonal system would be a radio, where changing the station does not change the volume and vice-versa. Now there is a hypothesis published in the the ACM Queue by Tim Bray - that some have called the Bánffy Bray Type System Criteria - which he summarises as: Static typings attractiveness is a direct function (and dynamic typings an inverse function) of API surface size. Dynamic typings attractiveness is a direct function (and static typings an inverse function) of unit testing workability. Now Stuart Halloway has reformulated Banfy Bray as: the more your APIs exceed orthogonality, the better you will like static typing My question is: What is the evidence that an API has exceeded its orthogonality in the context of types? Clarification Tim Bray introduces the idea of orthogonality and APIs. Where you have one API and it is mainly dealing with Strings (ie a web server serving requests and responses), then a uni-typed language (python, ruby) is 'aligned' to that API - because the the type system of these languages isn't sophisticated, but it doesn't matter since you're dealing with Strings anyway. He then moves on to Android programming, which has a whole bunch of sensor APIs, which are all 'different' to the web server API that he was working on previously. Because you're not just dealing with Strings, but with different types, the API is non-orthogonal. Tim's point is that there is a empirical relationship between your 'liking' of types and the API you're programming against. (ie a subjective point is actually objective depending on your context).

    Read the article

  • Is this a violation of the single responsiblity principle?

    - by L. Moser
    I have the following method and interface: public object ProcessRules(List<IRule> rules) { foreach(IRule rule in rules) { if(EvaluateExpression(rule.Exp) == true) return rule.Result; } //Some error handling here for not hitting any rules } public interface IRule { Expression Exp; Object Result; int Precedence; } Because rules have a precedence, they should actually never be processed out of order. This leads me with (I think) three solutions: Sort rules before passing them into the evaluator. Change the parameter type to something that enforces a sort order. Sort within the evaluator. I like option 3 because it always ensures that it is sorted and I like option 1 because it seems more cohesive. And option 2 seems like a good compromise. Is a scenario like this context specific/subjective, or is there really a best practice to be applied here?

    Read the article

  • Why does Windows 7 need hardware virtualization to run XP mode?

    - by Ken Pespisa
    I have a MacBook Pro and I've run VMware Fusion's unity mode and Parallels' cohesion mode along side the Mac OS X, and both work pretty seamlessly. I figured XP Mode in Windows 7 would be something similar, but I then learned my machine requires hardware virtualization support, which it does not have. My machine is an HP dc7800. That's a dual core 2.2GHz machine with 4GBs of RAM. Certainly it has the horsepower to run a virtual environment alongside the primary OS. I'm wondering: 1) Why Microsoft decided to make hardware virtualization a requirement and 2) What am I missing? Is the experience similar to Parallel's cohesion mode / Fusion's unity mode? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How does flocking algorithm work?

    - by Chan
    I read and understand the basic of flocking algorithm. Basically, we need to have 3 behaviors: 1. Cohesion 2. Separation 3. Alignment From my understanding, it's like a state machine. Every time we do an update (then draw), we check all the constraints on both three behaviors. And each behavior returns a Vector3 which is the "correct" orientation that an object should transform to. So my initial idea was /// <summary> /// Objects stick together /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> private Vector3 Cohesion() { Vector3 result = new Vector3(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); return result; } /// <summary> /// Object align /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> private Vector3 Align() { Vector3 result = new Vector3(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); return result; } /// <summary> /// Object separates from each others /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> private Vector3 Separate() { Vector3 result = new Vector3(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); return result; } Then I search online for pseudocode but many of them involve velocity and acceleration plus other stuffs. This part confused me. In my game, all objects move at constant speed, and they have one leader. So can anyone share me an idea how to start on implement this flocking algorithm? Also, did I understand it correctly? (I'm using XNA 4.0)

    Read the article

  • Explanation needed, for “Ask, don't tell” approach?

    - by the_naive
    I'm taking a course on design patterns in software engineering and here I'm trying to understand the good and the bad way of design relating to "coupling" and "cohesion". I could not understand the concept described in the following image. The example of code shown in the image is ambiguous to me, so I can't quite clearly get what exactly "Ask, don't tell!" approach mean. Could you please explain?

    Read the article

  • Console keyboard input OOP

    - by Alexandre P. Levasseur
    I am trying to build a very simple console-based game with a focus on using OOP instead of procedural programming because I intend to build up on that code for more complex projects. I am wondering if there is a design pattern that nicely handles this use case: There is a Player class with a MakeMove() method interacting with the board game. The MakeMove() method has to somehow get the user input yet I do not want to code it into the Player class as this would reduce cohesion and augment coupling. I was thinking of maybe having some controller class handle the sequence of events and thus the calls to keyboard input. However, that controller class would need to be able to handle differently the subclasses of Player (e.g. the AI class does not require keyboard input). Thoughts ?

    Read the article

  • Something confusing about Single Responsibility Principle

    - by user1483278
    1) In fact if two responsibilities are always expected to change at the same time you arguably should not separate them into different classes as this would lead, to quote Martin, to a "smell of Needless Complexity". The same is the case for responsibilities that never change - the behavior is invariant, and there is no need to split it. I assume even if non-related responsibilities are always expected to change for the same reason ( or if they never change ), we still shouldn't put them in the same class, since this would still violate high cohesion principle? 2) I've found two quite different definitions for SRP: Single Responsibility Principle says that a subsystem, module, class, or even a function, should not have more than one reason to change. and There should never be more than one reason for a class to change Doesn't the latter definition narrow SRP to a class level? If so, isn't first quote wrong by claiming that SRP can also be applied at subsystem, module and function levels? thank you

    Read the article

  • Writing Large Portions Of Code Then Debugging?

    - by The Floating Brain
    Lately I have been writing a game engine, and I have been writing a lot of "foundation stuff" (standard interfaces, modules, a message system ect.), but I have noticed a pattern, a lot of the stuff is interdependent and I can not debug until everything is done, hence I do not debug for about 3 to 5 hours at a time. I am wondering if this is an acceptable practice for this part of the project, and if not, if anyone can give me some advice? -----Update-----: I downloaded some code metrics tools, and my programs cyclomatic complexity is 1.52 which as I understand it is good, and should correlate to high cohesion, if I am wrong please correct me/

    Read the article

  • What is the most effective way to add functionality to unfamiliar, structurally unsound code?

    - by Coder
    This is probably something everyone has to face during the development sooner or later. You have an existing code written by someone else, and you have to extend it to work under new requirements. Sometimes it's simple, but sometimes the modules have medium to high coupling and medium to low cohesion, so the moment you start touching anything, everything breaks. And you don't feel that it's fixed correctly when you get the new and old scenarios working again. One approach would be to write tests, but in reality, in all cases I've seen, that was pretty much impossible (reliance on GUI, missing specifications, threading, complex dependencies and hierarchies, deadlines, etc). So everything sort of falls back to good ol' cowboy coding approach. But I refuse to believe there is no other systematic way that would make everything easier. Does anyone know a better approach, or the name of the methodology that should be used in such cases?

    Read the article

  • DDD and validation of aggregate root

    - by Mik378
    Suppose an aggregate root : MailConfiguration (wrapping an AddressPart object). The AddressPart object is a simple immutable value object with some fields like senderAdress, recipentAddress (to make example simple). As being an invariant object, AddressPart should logically wrap its own Validator (by the way of external a kind of AddressValidator for respecting Single Responsibility Principle) I read some articles that claimed an aggregateRoot must validate its 'children'. However, if we follow this principle, one could create an AddressPart with an uncohesive/invalid state. What are your opinion? Should I move the collaborator AddressValidator(used in constructor so in order to validate immediately the cohesion of an AddressPart) from AddressPart and assign it to aggregateRoot (MailConfiguration) ?

    Read the article

  • How to determine if class meets single responsibility principle ?

    - by user1483278
    Single Responsibility Principle is based on high cohesion principle. The difference between the two is that highly cohesive classes feature a set of responsibilities that are strongly related, while classes adhering to SRP have just one responsibility. But how do we determine whether particular class features a set of responsibilities and is thus just highly cohesive, or whether it has only one responsibility and is thus adhering to SRP? Namely, isn't it more or less subjective, since some may find class very granular ( and as such will consider a class as adhering to SRP ), while others may find it not granular enough?

    Read the article

  • Alligning a multiline li in an ul

    - by user146780
    I have two li (points) on this page http://animactions.ca/Animactions/le_developpement_des_equipes_de_travail.php that take up two lines. I'm not sure how to properly align them so that they line up with the first line. I'm referring to this point: Renforcir la cohésion et l’esprit d’équipe pour un travail proactif et durable qui génère des rendements supérieurs. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Rolling your own Hackathon

    - by Terrance
    Background Info Hey, I pitched the idea of a company Hackathon that would donate our time to a charity to work on a project (for free) to improve morale in my company and increase developer cohesion. As it turns out most like the idea but, guess who's gonna be the one to put it together. lol Yeah me. I should add that we are a fairly small shop with about 10-12 programmers (some pull double duty as programmers, inters etc..) So, that might make things a bit easier. Base Question While I am no means a project manager or of any level of authority (Entry level guy) I was wondering if anyone knew the best approach for someone in my position to put together such an even with possibly (some) company backing. Or for that matter have any helpful advice to pass along to a young padawan. So far..... As of right now it is just an idea so, to start with I presumably would have to put together some sort of proposal and do some that office stuff that I became a programmer to steer clear of to some extent.

    Read the article

  • SOLID Thoughts

    - by GeekAgilistMercenary
    SOLID came up again in discussion.  What is SOLID?  Well, glad you asked, because I am going to elaborate on the SOLID Principles a bit. Initial Concept S Single Responsibility Principle O Open/Closed Principle L Liskov Substitution Principle I Interface Segregation Principle D Dependency Inversion/Injection Principle The Single Responsibility Principle (SRP) is stated that every object should have a single responsibility and should be entirely encapsulated by the class.  This helps keep cohesion.  Here is a short example, starting with a basic class. public class Car { decimal Gas; int Doors; int Speed; decimal RampJumpSpeed; } Now I will refactor a little bit to make it a bit more SRP friendly. public class Car { decimal Gas; int Speed; }   public class DuneBuggy : Car { decimal RampJumpSpeed; }   public class EconomyCar : Car { int Doors; } What we end up with, instead of one class, is an abstract class and two classes that have their respective methods or properties to keep the responsibilities were they need to be. The Open Closed Principle (OCP) is one of my favorites, which states simply, that you should be able to extend a classes behavior without modifying it.  There are a couple of ways one can extend a class, by inheritance, composition, or by proxy implementation.  The Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP) states that a derived class must be substitutable for their base classes. The Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP) states that one should depend on abstractions and not on concrete implementations. Finally, the Interface Segregation Principle (ISP) states that fine grain interfaces should be client specific. So hope that helps with kicking off a basic understanding of SOLID Principles.  I will be following this entry up with some new bits in the near future related to good software design and practice. Original post.

    Read the article

  • Oracle MDM at the MDM Summit in San Francisco

    - by David Butler
    Oracle is sponsoring the Product MDM track at this year’s MDM & Data Governance San Francisco Summit. Sachin Patel, Director of Product Strategy, Product Hub Applications, at Oracle will present the keynote: Product Master Data Management for Today’s Enterprise. Here’s the abstract: Today businesses struggle to boost operational efficiency and meet new product launch deadlines due to poor and cumbersome administrative processes. One of the primary reasons enterprises are unable to achieve cohesion is due to various domain silos and fragmented product data. This adversely affects business performance including, but not limited to, excess inventories, under-leveraged procurement spend, downstream invoicing or order errors and lost sales opportunities. In this session, you will learn the key elements and business processes that are required for you to master an enterprise product record. Additionally you will gain insights into how to improve the accuracy of your data and deliver reliable and consistent product information across your enterprise. This provides a high level of confidence that business managers can achieve their goals. In this session, you will understand how adopting a Master Data Management strategy for product information can help your enterprise change course towards a more profitable, competitive and successful business. Cisco Systems will join Sachin and cover their experiences, lessons learned and best practices. If you are in the Bay Area and interested in mastering your product data for the benefit of multiple applications, business processes and analytical systems, please join us at the Hyatt, Fisherman’s Wharf this Thursday, June 30th.

    Read the article

  • Advantages and Disadvantages of the Waterfall Methodology

    In my personal opinion I believe the waterfall method is one of the worst methodologies to use when developing larger systems because it leaves is no room for mistakes. As the name implies the waterfall methodology does not allow  for projects to go back up stream to recover from design errors, missing and/or limited requirements. In addition, hidden bugs are not usually found until the testing phase. This can prove to be very costly and time consuming to the developer and the client. According to NCycles.com, the waterfall methodology structures a project into separate stages with defined deliverables from each phase. Define Design Code Test Implement Document and Maintain The advantages found by Ncycle.com to this methodology are: Ease in analyzing potential changes  Ability to coordinate larger teams, even if geographically distributed Can enable precise dollar budget Less total time required from Subject Matter Experts The disadvantages found by Ncycle.com to this methodology are: Lack of flexibility Hard to predict all needs in advance Intangible knowledge lost between hand-offs Lack of team cohesion Design flaws not discovered until the Testing phase References: NCycles.com  (2002). Retrieved from http://www.ncycles.com/e_whi_Methodologies.htmmethodology on April 17, 2009

    Read the article

  • Does Agile force developers to work more?

    - by Shooshpanchick
    Looking at common Agile practices it seems to me that they (intentionally or unintentionally?) force developer to spend more time actually working as opposed to reading blogs/articles, chatting, coffee breaks and just plain procrastinating. In particular: 1) Pair programming - the biggest work-forcer, just because it is inconvenient to do all that procrastination when there are two of you sitting together. 2) Short stories - when you have a HUGE chunk of work that must be done in e.g. a month, it is pretty common to slack off in the first three weeks and switch to OMG DEADLINE mode for the last one. And with the little chunks (that must be done in a day or less) it is exact opposite - you feel that time is tight, there is no space for maneuvering, and you will be held accountable for the task pretty soon, so you start working immediately. 3) Team communication and cohesion - when you underperform in a slow, distanced and silent environment it may feel ok, but when at the end of the day at Scrum meeting everyone boasts what they have accomplished and you have nothing to say you may actually feel ashamed. 4) Testing and feedback - again, it prevents you from keeping tasks "99% ready" (when it's actually around 20%) until the deadline suddenly happens. Do you feel that under Agile you work more than under "conventional" methodologies? Is this pressure compensated by the more comfortable environment and by the feeling of actually getting right things done quickly?

    Read the article

  • Pros and Cons of Facebook's React vs. Web Components (Polymer)

    - by CletusW
    What are the main benefits of Facebook's React over the upcoming Web Components spec and vice versa (or perhaps a more apples-to-apples comparison would be to Google's Polymer library)? According to this JSConf EU talk and the React homepage, the main benefits of React are: Decoupling and increased cohesion using a component model Abstraction, Composition and Expressivity Virtual DOM & Synthetic events (which basically means they completely re-implemented the DOM and its event system) Enables modern HTML5 event stuff on IE 8 Server-side rendering Testability Bindings to SVG, VML, and <canvas> Almost everything mentioned is being integrated into browsers natively through Web Components except this virtual DOM concept (obviously). I can see how the virtual DOM and synthetic events can be beneficial today to support old browsers, but isn't throwing away a huge chunk of native browser code kind of like shooting yourself in the foot in the long term? As far as modern browsers are concerned, isn't that a lot of unnecessary overhead/reinventing of the wheel? Here are some things I think React is missing that Web Components will care of. Correct me if I'm wrong. Native browser support (read "guaranteed to be faster") Write script in a scripting language, write styles in a styling language, write markup in a markup language. Style encapsulation using Shadow DOM React instead has this, which requires writing CSS in JavaScript. Not pretty. Two-way binding

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >