 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/10/2010 8:21 AM, nemesis wrote:
>
> I believe any software eventually reach that stage. The more you add,
> the more complex, the more resistent to change, the more ugly, the more
> fragile to subtle bugs. Its inertial mass at work...
>
In our case I think it's a matter of requirements drift and feature
creep making it so fragile. We've done so many "pull this block out and
place it in a different area of the stack" changes lately, that the
software really is starting to resemble Jenga.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/10/2010 10:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
> off of managing, and have employees who are decent coders but shit
> programmers, and still think you can create something usable. Which
I'm curious. What is the distinction between a coder and programmer, here?
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/10/2010 10:52 AM, Invisible wrote:
> - The program gets so many feature requests that the entire scope of the
> program is fundamentally altered. Sometimes a program designed for X
> ends up having to do Y instead (where X and Y aren't really related),
> but a much more common paradigm is where a program designed to do X ends
> up being required to do X, Y, Z, W, K, R, J, L, S and V. And maybe you
> could add F as well? By the weekend?
>
Oh, yes.. and while you're at it, would it be too difficult to add ∂, ∆,
σ, λ, θ, ω? I really thing feature ω will be the ultimate feature for
this application!
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> - The program gets so many feature requests that the entire scope of the
>> program is fundamentally altered. Sometimes a program designed for X
>> ends up having to do Y instead (where X and Y aren't really related),
>> but a much more common paradigm is where a program designed to do X ends
>> up being required to do X, Y, Z, W, K, R, J, L, S and V. And maybe you
>> could add F as well? By the weekend?
>
> Oh, yes.. and while you're at it, would it be too difficult to add ∂, ∆,
> σ, λ, θ, ω? I really thing feature ω will be the ultimate feature for
> this application!
Sure. Just for the love of God, don't ask me to make it a web
application and expect it to work in IE /and/ standards-compliant
browsers... >_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 11/11/2010 15:17, Mike Raiford nous fit lire :
> On 11/10/2010 10:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
>
>> off of managing, and have employees who are decent coders but shit
>> programmers, and still think you can create something usable. Which
>
> I'm curious. What is the distinction between a coder and programmer, here?
>
Along the same as between a writer and an author, for literacy.
Knowing the alphabet is not enough to be Victor Hugo even if Victor Hugo
did know the alphabet too.
Alas, so many people thinks that they can make a database because they
managed to make three columns on an excel-sheet.
They succeed to make an hello world in whatever language...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford escreveu:
> On 11/10/2010 10:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
>
>> off of managing, and have employees who are decent coders but shit
>> programmers, and still think you can create something usable. Which
>
> I'm curious. What is the distinction between a coder and programmer, here?
a coder types away careful algorithms of how to do something as in a spec.
a programmer receives a half-baked spec in natural language and has to
translate that to l33tsp34k at the same time magaging to map the
instructions into the computational model already in place.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> Only occasionally have I managed to convince a boss it'll be faster to
> rewrite this from scratch than it will be to add the feature you're asking for.
Sometimes (often?) rewriting the whole thing from scratch would indeed
take much longer than adding the small new feature. However, the rewrite
would benefit the project in the long run, as subsequent features would
become easier to add, saving in the total time.
However, I assume it's difficult to convince a boss of the fact that
"if we spend a month rewriting the whole thing from scratch now, we will
save several months of work later".
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Only occasionally have I managed to convince a boss it'll be faster to
>> rewrite this from scratch than it will be to add the feature you're asking for.
>
> Sometimes (often?) rewriting the whole thing from scratch would indeed
> take much longer than adding the small new feature. However, the rewrite
> would benefit the project in the long run, as subsequent features would
> become easier to add, saving in the total time.
Not to mention the amount of debugging time you'd save...
> However, I assume it's difficult to convince a boss of the fact that
> "if we spend a month rewriting the whole thing from scratch now, we will
> save several months of work later".
Unfortunately, it tends to be quite hard to measure "time we didn't have
to spend because we did X last year"...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Mike Raiford escreveu:
>> On 11/10/2010 10:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> off of managing, and have employees who are decent coders but shit
>>> programmers, and still think you can create something usable. Which
>>
>> I'm curious. What is the distinction between a coder and programmer,
>> here?
>
> a coder types away careful algorithms of how to do something as in a spec.
> a programmer receives a half-baked spec in natural language and has to
> translate that to l33tsp34k at the same time magaging to map the
> instructions into the computational model already in place.
>
Plus, the coder writes code. The programmer writes programs. If you think
the only part of a program is the code, then you're part of the problem.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> Oh, yes.. and while you're at it,
My favorite was when the boss asked me to do a program for an HR manager to
use to manage HR benefits. I said "OK, about six weeks." Four or five weeks
in, he asks how long it would take to change the program to let the
employees use it instead. He was rather shocked when I said "About eight weeks."
Yeah, there's a slight difference between the requirements to allow a teller
to take money out of your account on request and an ATM.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
