Search Results

Search found 5 results on 1 pages for 'keesdijk'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Are today's general purpose languages at the right level of abstarction ?

  - by KeesDijk

  Today Uncle Bob Martin, a genuine hero, showed this video In this video Bob Martin claims that our programming languages are at the right level for our problems at this time. One of the reasons I get from this video as that he Bob Martin sees us detail managers and our problems are at the detail level. This is the first time I have to disagree with Bob Martin and was wondering what the people at programmers think about this. First there is a difference between MDA and MDE MDA in itself hasn't worked and I blame way to much formalisation at a level you can't formalize these kind of problems. MDE and MDD are still trying to prove themselves and in my mind show great promise. e.g. look at MetaEdit The detail still needs to be management in my mind, but you do so in one place (framework or generators) instead of at multiple places. Right for our kind of problems ? I think depends on what problems you look at. Do the current programming languages keep up with the current demands on time to market ? Are they good at bridging the business IT communication gap ? So what do you think ?

  Read the article

• Are today's general purpose languages at the right level of abstraction ?

  - by KeesDijk

  Today Uncle Bob Martin, a genuine hero, showed this video In this video Bob Martin claims that our programming languages are at the right level for our problems at this time. One of the reasons I get from this video as that Bob Martin sees us as detail managers and our problems are at the detail level. This is the first time I have to disagree with Bob Martin and was wondering what the people at programmers think about this. First there is a difference between MDA and MDE MDA in itself hasn't worked and I blame way to much formalisation at a level you can't formalize these kind of problems. MDE and MDD are still trying to prove themselves and in my mind show great promise. e.g. look at MetaEdit The detail still needs to be management in my mind, but you do so in one place (framework or generators) instead of at multiple places. Right for our kind of problems ? I think depends on what problems you look at. Do the current programming languages keep up with the current demands on time to market ? Are they good at bridging the business IT communication gap ? So what do you think ?

  Read the article

• Why aren't we all doing model driven development yet ?

  - by KeesDijk

  I am a true believer in Model Driven Development, I think it has the possibility to increase productivity, quality and predictability. When looking at MetaEdit the results are amazing. Mendix in the Netherlands is growing very very fast and has great results. I also know there are a lot of problems versioning of generators, templates and framework projects that just aren't right for model driven development (not enough repetition) higher risks (when the first project fails, you have less results than you would have with more traditional development) etc But still these problems seem solvable and the benefits should outweigh the effort needed. Question: What do you see as the biggest problems that make you not even consider model driven development ? I want to use these answers not just for my own understanding but also as a possible source for a series of internal articles I plan to write.

  Read the article

• Solid principles vs YAGNI

  - by KeesDijk

  When do the SOLID principles become YAGNI. As programmers we make trade-off's all the time, between complexity, maintainabillity, time to build and so forth.Amongst others. two of the smartest guidelines for making choices are in my mind the SOLID principles and YAGNI. If you don't need it, dont build it and keep it clean. Now for example when i watch the dimecast series on SOLID I see it start out as a fairly simple programm and ending up prettty complex (end yes complexity is also in the eye of the beholder) but it still makes me wonder, when do SOLID principles turn into something you don't need. All solid principles are ways of working that enable use te make changes at a later stage. But what if the problem to solve is a pretty simple one and it's a through away application, than what ? Or are the SOLID principles something that apply always ?

  Read the article

• Solid principles vs YAGNI

  - by KeesDijk

  When do the SOLID principles become YAGNI? As programmers we make trade-offs all the time, between complexity, maintainability, time to build and so forth. Amongst others, two of the smartest guidelines for making choices are in my mind the SOLID principles and YAGNI. If you don't need it; don't build it, and keep it clean. Now for example, when I watch the dimecast series on SOLID, I see it starts out as a fairly simple program, and ends up as a pretty complex one (end yes complexity is also in the eye of the beholder), but it still makes me wonder: when do SOLID principles turn into something you don't need? All solid principles are ways of working that enable use to make changes at a later stage. But what if the problem to solve is a pretty simple one and it's a throwaway application, then what? Or are the SOLID principles something that always apply? As asked in the comments: Solid Principles YAGNI

  Read the article

1