I basically want to get an idea of the percentage of those who think that the single liability principle in the real world It is advisable to use the code and how really is the inept real world talking about this op theory in Joel; And further, it shows how people like Uncle Bob have not written the possibility of non-trivial systems.
I have played or played a major role in some software projects personally but now only in this method, my young career in this method liked the voice of this principle and actually started using it Would like to. I think Joel's argument in the podcast is very weak (as you tell others if you continue to read blog comments) but, is there any truth in this?
What does the community think?
I have had experience of applying some principles and my experience is mainly good, Heard and it seems that Jeff or Joel has not tried any of those things which they are talking for a long time, actually bringing benefits into the ass. Normally the main argument against "you write more code" is if I think what I do, I can probably write 10% more than 20% code (usually interface definitions), but because everything is too much , It is very satisfying. I rarely have situations where changes in one part of my application break other parts. So 20% additional code pays for myself to maintain me.
Jeff also missed the point on the quality of the code; he does not see the quality of the code as a great benefit to the customer and that's right, the customer does not care. The customer takes care about implementing new features, and where the quality of the code comes. I have found that, as much as possible, the investment of keeping quality of code has always been done within a few months. High quality = low maintenance.
I agree with them that you should have anything practical about these things. If you need to give something then go ahead and make it fast and dirty. But clear later.
Comments
Post a Comment