Critique of Robert C. Martin's "Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices"
in [OOP]
|
From: Robert Martin on 25 Jan 2007 19:32 On 2007-01-23 18:11:25 -0600, "topmind" <topmind(a)technologist.com> said: >> We can argue about whether the net work is greater or >> less. From my point of view it is significantly less since I can >> forget about the SQL and Schema while dealing with the business rules >> and interface. > > SQL = biz logic. Here's a simple business problem for you to code in SQL: http://bossavit.com/cgi-bin/dojo.pl?HarryPotterKata > ...repetition of claim does not make it true... I'm glad you finally agree. > Those who know how to use SQL and RDBMS effective can > shorten and simplify code because OO is crappy and inconsistent at > collection handling and meta-tizing attribute management. Those who know software engineering know how to use SQL and RDBMS and OO together to create the best systems. -- Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob)��| email: unclebob(a)objectmentor.com Object Mentor Inc.� � � � � ��| blog:��www.butunclebob.com The Agile Transition Experts��| web:���www.objectmentor.com 800-338-6716� � � � � � � � ��|
From: Robert Martin on 25 Jan 2007 19:49 On 2007-01-23 23:04:15 -0600, "topmind" <topmind(a)technologist.com> said: >> One way is not better than the other; but BOTH ways are better than just one. > > But there are no clear, consensus criteria for when to use one over the > other. You don't use one OVER the other, you use the two to complement each other. > People's selection seems to be a personal preference. Actually, there is a rather large body of knowledge published about how to use the two together. Consider, for example, Fowler's "Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture" for starters. You may be vocal, Bryce, but you are in a profoundly parochial minority. -- Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob)��| email: unclebob(a)objectmentor.com Object Mentor Inc.� � � � � ��| blog:��www.butunclebob.com The Agile Transition Experts��| web:���www.objectmentor.com 800-338-6716� � � � � � � � ��|
From: Robert Martin on 25 Jan 2007 19:58 On 2007-01-24 06:10:30 -0600, frebe73(a)gmail.com said: > I am not > saying that behavior is not needed, I am only opposing your statement > that "we are being paid to create payroll behaviors". We are getting > paid to produce payroll data (paychecks). Interesting point of view. Now back to reality. We are being paid to transform data in one form, into data in another form. The fact that the end result is data is certainly the end goal of our user. We are being paid, however, to produce the data the enables the transformation. (i.e. the program). > The most stupid thing about OO is data hiding. Why should we hide the > stuff that are most important of all? (sigh). *information* hiding means hiding the *implementation* of data and behavior. BTW, I think "information hiding" was coined by Dave Parnas in 1971 long before OO was popular. (http://www.acm.org/classics/may96/) -- Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob)��| email: unclebob(a)objectmentor.com Object Mentor Inc.� � � � � ��| blog:��www.butunclebob.com The Agile Transition Experts��| web:���www.objectmentor.com 800-338-6716� � � � � � � � ��|
From: JXStern on 25 Jan 2007 23:23 On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:43:12 -0600, Robert Martin <unclebob(a)objectmentor.com> wrote: >> I deny any such claim even makes sense, other than making Agile a >> wrapper you can throw anything at all into. > >My point was that "Agile" makes no judgements on whether a parcticular >tool is "good" or "bad" (i.e. pro/con). Rather it makes judgements >about how and when tools should be used. I deny that it makes even a little bit of sense to say that Agile offers any judgement on when and whether to use RDBMS. You're overloading the term "Agile" to link unrelated advice in random directions. J.
From: topmind on 25 Jan 2007 23:42
Robert Martin wrote: > On 2007-01-23 18:11:25 -0600, "topmind" <topmind(a)technologist.com> said: > > >> We can argue about whether the net work is greater or > >> less. From my point of view it is significantly less since I can > >> forget about the SQL and Schema while dealing with the business rules > >> and interface. > > > > SQL = biz logic. > > Here's a simple business problem for you to code in SQL: > http://bossavit.com/cgi-bin/dojo.pl?HarryPotterKata It looks like one of those programming contest puzzles, kind of like Towers of Hanoi. I'll perhaps consider it, but after we finish with payroll stuff. > > > ...repetition of claim does not make it true... > > I'm glad you finally agree. > > > Those who know how to use SQL and RDBMS effective can > > shorten and simplify code because OO is crappy and inconsistent at > > collection handling and meta-tizing attribute management. > > Those who know software engineering know how to use SQL and RDBMS and > OO together to create the best systems. Those who know software engineering either admit something is a subjective personal preference when it is, OR offer CLEAR evidence of why OO makes it better and don't just use the single change scenario favored by OO. At least I entertain the possibility that tables are a subjective preference. > > -- > Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob) | email: unclebob(a)objectmentor.com -T- |