[DUG] OO Programming

[Todd Martin]

Well I would say a "Software Architect" must be an order of magnitude 
higher than a "Software Engineer", given the lowly status of engineering 
in NZ.

Todd.
> Steve
>
> As my father was fond of saying (When we agreed ) "Great minds think 
> alike" followed by "Fools seldom differ"
>
> Thanks for clarifying the "Software Architect" could also be "Software 
> Bigot" or  "Software Supplier Patsy" or my favourite
> "Software smartass employed at great expense to force fit application 
> selected by drunken board members at the club to serve company"
>
> Again offtopic this is an enjoyable watch (also lamblasts Architects) 
>
> http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/james_howard_kunstler_dissects_suburbia.html
>
> Neven
>
>   
>> "cunning bastard" - must have that printed on my cards.
>>
>> Must be something to do with age as they say that "Wisdom comes with 
>> age". But someone once told me that "Sometimes age comes all on its 
>> own". I find it never pays to ask if that's happened with me :o)
>>
>> As for the "Software Architect" title that started this thread (it all 
>> eventually runs in a full circle). That is normally someone who knows 
>> an ERP system (e.g. SAP / PeopleSoft / Microsoft Dynamics Navision / 
>> JD Edwards / et el.) so well that they can design the interfaces 
>> between the various ERP components and external functionality in big 
>> diagrams on a whiteboard.
>>
>> Essentially however, I much prefer the description given earlier that 
>> corresponds to the "What is an expert" description - someone brought 
>> in from another city and wearing a suit and carrying a briefcase.
>>
>> Steve
>> http://stevepeacocke.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Neven MacEwan <neven at mwk.co.nz 
>> <mailto:neven at mwk.co.nz>> wrote:
>>
>>     Steve
>>
>>     Thats because your a cunning bastard that has worked out telling the
>>     masses its easy never pays..
>>
>>     This is appropo to the Software Architect Question...whatr the f%k
>>     is a
>>     Software Architect?
>>     Sounds like a title looking for a salary
>>
>>     Neven
>>
>>
>>     > Its never "that other 5%". My favourite saying is explaining
>>     that the
>>     > main problem with most programming is that last little wee 95%.
>>     >
>>     > :o)
>>     >
>>     > Steve
>>     > http://stevepeacocke.blogspot.com/
>>     >
>>     > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Neven MacEwan <neven at mwk.co.nz
>>     <mailto:neven at mwk.co.nz>
>>     > <mailto:neven at mwk.co.nz <mailto:neven at mwk.co.nz>>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >     Steve
>>     >
>>     >     So what we need is OO RAD? Where you define classes and they
>>     >     'instantly'
>>     >     appear on your palette (and are dynamically updated)
>>     >     And a O-R framework is part of the language?
>>     >
>>     >     The problem has been of course that the Table Row = Business
>>     >     Object is a
>>     >     95% accurate solution and so the Delphi IDE
>>     >     has basically delivered in 95% of situations
>>     >
>>     >     That other 5% is a bastard though
>>     >
>>     >     Just a thought
>>     >     Neven
>>     >     > Yea, thanks Conor,
>>     >     >
>>     >     > Sure, in RAD, as it is in any Delphi project, you can
>>     certainly get
>>     >     > away with simply programming the event handlers in the
>>     components
>>     >     > (depending on the application). That should not preclude being
>>     >     able to
>>     >     > create, for example, an Application Object that handles
>>     all your
>>     >     > globals like the logged in user, or the company name and other
>>     >     details
>>     >     > needed at times (e.g.; lbCompany.Caption :=
>>     oApp.CompanyName) -
>>     >     where
>>     >     > perhaps the company name is extracted from the database
>>     etc. In this
>>     >     > example, oApp knows how to extract the company name, and
>>     perhaps
>>     >     even
>>     >     > format it for display.
>>     >     >
>>     >     > RAD does not mean ShiteProgramming, or
>>     NoThoughtProgramming. Its
>>     >     hard
>>     >     > to find a definitive definition (?) for RAD and a quick
>>     search shows
>>     >     > various descriptions from the tool itself (Delphi or VB)
>>     to the
>>     >     whole
>>     >     > spectrum of Agile methodologies.
>>     >     >
>>     >     > However, I do disagree with the assertion that RAD does
>>     not lend
>>     >     > itself to larger apps (or did you mean "Rapid
>>     Prototyping"). In fact
>>     >     > RAD is an excellent development environment for developing
>>     even
>>     >     > enterprise level applications. Some years ago I had the
>>     pleasure of
>>     >     > working in a team of between 3-5 developers where we used
>>     a RAD
>>     >     > approach (using Delphi) in an iterative and incremental
>>     development
>>     >     > methodology to produce a very large scale corporate
>>     application and
>>     >     > can confirm the approach as excellent and the development far
>>     >     > outperforms a team up to 10 times larger using Java/J2EE in a
>>     >     refined
>>     >     > waterfall approach for a similar sized project.
>>     >     >
>>     >     > Steve
>>     >     >
>>     >     > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Conor Boyd
>>     >     <Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz>
>>     <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz>>
>>     >     > <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz
>>     <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz>
>>     >     <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz
>>     <mailto:Conor.Boyd at trimble.co.nz>>>> wrote:
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     Probably because I don't put the acronym RAD and the word
>>     >     >     "programming" together as you have done.
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     From my POV, RAD is generally taken to mean what the
>>     acronym
>>     >     >     stands for, Rapid Application Development; i.e. drop some
>>     >     >     components on to a form, wire up a few event handlers,
>>     voila.
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     Doesn't mean I don't "do" OOP in event handlers and
>>     the little
>>     >     >     amount of code that is required in such an app, but
>>     IMHO you're
>>     >     >     comparing apples with oranges.
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     RAD does not lend itself to larger apps which are
>>     intended to be
>>     >     >     easily maintainable and intended to be worked on by a
>>     team of
>>     >     >     developers.
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     Cheers,
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     C.
>>     >     >
>>     >     >
>>     >    
>