Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[extremeprogramming] Re: Elves in the Night [Stupid XP Question Number6614]

Expand Messages
  • Tom Kreitzberg
    ... From my perspective, the OCP implies this sort of flexibility, but this sort of flexibility does not imply the OCP. I don t remember anything in what I ve
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 6, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Robert Martin writes:

      > Flexibility means the same to me now as it did five years ago.
      > The ability to add or change significant amounts of functionality
      > while changing a minimum of exsiting code -- i.e. the OCP.

      From my perspective, the OCP implies this sort of flexibility,
      but this sort of flexibility does not imply the OCP. I don't
      remember anything in what I've read of XP that said, "The source
      code of [an extensible] module is inviolate" (to quote from your
      1996 paper, "The Open Closed Principle"). If anything, I'd say it
      values keeping all code open for modification, against the day
      when it becomes too simple to meet the new requirements.

      This may not be a philosophical difference between "Designing OO
      C++ Apps Using Booch" and XP -- the fundamental principle is
      to be ready for change -- but it does lead to a practical
      difference in what one does on any given day.

      Is your confidence in the ability of a designer to know when
      and where the design will need to change the same today as
      it was five years ago?

      > It is my goal over the next several months to integrate the
      > principles and XP.

      I look forward to this.

      Tom

      --
      Tom Kreitzberg | The Johns Hopkins University
      Tom.Kreitzberg@... | Applied Physics Laboratory
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.