Why I don't post on this blog

When I started the blog, I thought I would share a lot of my experiences and thoughts about software development. After all, I am code obsessed. I read and think about code almost as much as I actually code.

What I have learned about myself is that I don't really have much desire to write about what I read and think about. The reason for this is simple: I feel it is all derivative. What I mean by that is that any serious developer has read read Clean Code, Pragmatic Programmer, Refactor, Refactoring to Pattern, Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture, Agile Software Development, Service Oriented Architecture, SOA in Practice, Domain Driven Design, Applying Domain-Driven Design and Patterns, Head First Design Patterns, Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering, Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework, Practices of an Agile Developer, the 97 Things books, etc, etc. He/she also probably follows blogs like Los Techies, DotNetKicks, Object Mentor, InfoQ, Joel on Software, Martin Fowler, Dan North, Ayende, Jeremy D Miller, etc, etc. And he/she undoubtedly attended or watched the session videos from conferences like SDBest or NDC.

Anyway, what I'm saying is that I think that most of my thoughts on software craftsmanship aren't new. They are all regurgitated wisdom of smarter people than me. With only 11 years in this craft, I'm just a journeyman with so much to learn. I advise you to follow some of the masters of our craft and only involve me if you are having an interesting conversation that I won't detract from too much. I do LOVE to talk about software development after all... ;-)

-DA

Comments

  1. Dave AdsitFebruary 7, 2011 at 10:14 PM

    Well apparently I am a liar who IS posting on his blog again...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TFS to SVN Conversion with History

Recently, the team I was on wanted to move our source code from Team Foundation Server to SVN for reasons that had almost nothing to do with source control directly. This would be a pretty simple operation, but we didn't want to lose access to the history when the operations team turned off the machine running TFS. We couldn't find any direct paths for moving history from TFS to SVN, so instead we chose to use git as an intermediary. Here's how we did it: Step 1 - Install the tools Install msysgit: http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/ Install git-tfs: https://github.com/git-tfs/git-tfs Step 2 - Pull TFS history to local git repository git tfs clone <tfs-project-url> "$/<tfs-project-name>/<tfs-project-folder>" <localfolder> example: git tfs clone http://tfs-001:8080/tfs/projectroot "$/Reference Architecture/ReferenceArchitecture" RefArch Step 3 - Initialize git-svn * User Lower Case - Caps will make it fail! * Change direc...
Read more

Simpler Tests: What kind of test are you writing?

One common problem that I see in test suites is confusion about what each test should cover. This confusion often leads to tests that are either too broad or too focused to accomplish the goal of the author. When writing a test, it is important to think about what kind of test it will be and the constraints that make that type of test effective. There are a few broad categories of tests that I keep in mind to help focus my testing: Unit Tests Also called micro tests, unit tests form the foundation of any good testing strategy. These are tests that test a single class or method in isolation from it's dependencies. Mocks and stubs help us isolate the code under test and make our tests more focused and expressive. A test that touches any external resource such as the database, the file system, a web service, etc is never a unit test. The primary purpose of unit tests is to validate that the subject under test is functionally correct for the expected inputs and outputs. Additiona...
Read more

Architecture at different levels of abstraction

Image
This week I am attending the O'Reilly Architecture Conference in NYC with my team and I had the pleasure of attending a two day training on Building Evolutionary Architectures presented by Neal Ford and Rebecca Parsons . During this session, on of the things we talked about extensively was coupling. We looked at dependency maps for different architectural styles including the big ball of mud . We saw something like the following and almost everyone agreed, "That is a bad architecture." Big Ball of Mud This reminded me of something I has seen elsewhere before, and after a quick search, I found it: Amazon and Netflix Death Star Architectures The ball of mud is considered obviously wrong by most architects, but the death star seems to be held up as an ideal by just as many and likely most of the same architects. Why is this? Are afferent coupling (inbound dependencies) and efferent coupling (outreaching dependencies) only important at a certain sc...
Read more