4 + 1 View Model

It was a funny adaptation of the six blind men fabled repurposed to programming and software. I believe it managed to transmit the lesson It wanted to give, but a final explanation in not fable form would have been appreciated. Like it was really easy after watching the video about the 4 + 1 View Model, but otherwise that part of the fable would have probably flown over my head, and just by reading without thinking in the order of the model I had issues trying to grasp which programmer was which view.

For example, the programmer not-programmer confused me about which view they were supposed to be, although I suppose it is in the same order that the model is presented in the graph of the first video. So, I would guess the fourth “programmer” would be the development view in the 4+1 View Model, but after noticing the oscilloscope and the multimeter I realized that she represented the Physical View as it is the one involved with hardware. The fifth programmer was also a mystery for the several knowledges she claimed to be, but when it mentioned useful creature, I realized that it probably referred to the Use Case View. The Jar programmer was another that I did not immediately realized who he was supposed to be, but after a while I realized that it was the Development View, and it was opening modules. The first two were more obvious to me being that the first one is the Logical View, and the second one is the Process View.

The fable and my hard time identifying some of the programmers made me realize that probably my weakest view is the Physical View as I do not remember ever making a deployment diagram or learning much about hardware or doing a hardware arquitecture

Comentarios

Publicar un comentario

Entradas populares de este blog

Is design dead?

  “Any unneeded complexity makes a system harder to change in all directions except the one you anticipate with the complex flexibility you put in”. I believe that quote of the reading is the one that does a better job explaining why you need simplicity in the code and the strong point of programming for the present, not for the future. As indeed making a part of my code easy to modify would need that I make the assumption of what type of change would be needed in the future. I really like his moderate posture or coward as he calls it because in some of the things he mentions regarding design or having absolutely no architecture at all, do sound too extreme especially when in situations where is clear from day one that you do need a database. I particularly like his posture in regards to architecture of doing it, but take it as a sketch not something written in stone as you do not know what possible requirement changes come in a project or what specific issues come during the programmi
Leer más

SOLID

  The SOLID principles are really good advice and were explained in a really simple way during this article. Some of them I had already heard as in the past I have read one of Uncle Bob’s books during the Videogame project course. The Single Responsibility Principle is the only one of the principles that until now I always have in mind while writing classes, although being honest just as the article says it is not always that straightforward what would be considered doing only one thing, so sometimes I may not apply it perfectly. The Open/Closed Principle and the Liskov Substitution Principle those are principles that are new to me and certainly go against some of the things I knew.   Because I had learned to use inheritance in those situations, although reading the article I agree that abusing inheritance may not always be a good idea as it may leave the code in an unpleasant state or generate side effects. The Interface Segregation Principle I never had thought about doing that,
Leer más

Software Craftsmanship

  I have been trying to avoid of thinking of programming as a craftmanship since some years ago because we were kind of thought that it was incorrect. During our software development courses we were taught that treating it as a craftmanship was what caused it. But the way uncle Bob explained it as a craftmanship did resonate with me as indeed you do feel proud of your code when it works, and when you manage to program an elegant solution or a clean code it does feel better. Also, everyone has their own way of programming for example when in a group project I see a variable with an unholy name such as ‘iiiiiiiiiii’ I immediately ask Óscar if he did it, and with people you have programmed multiple times you get a feeling of how they code. Maybe it is not a wrong way to see code after all if you can follow the software craftmanship manifesto, which indeed as they say it is not nearly as popular as the agile manifesto. The points in them do sound like really good programming practices to
Leer más