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

Re: [XP] Digest Number 1062

Expand Messages
  • Joel Neely
    Re Code normalization : For what it s worth, I d suggest not ... ... ... because, from the point of view of both Mathematics and RDB theory, normalization
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 29, 2001
      Re "Code normalization":

      For what it's worth, I'd suggest not ...

      > Message: 17
      > Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 10:40:43 -0700
      > From: Phlip <pplumlee@...>
      > Subject: Re: Code Normalization (was RE: Factoring)
      >
      > Proclaimed azami@... from the mountaintops:
      >
      > > In fact, "code normalization" may be a better term than
      > > "refactoring"... in refactoring, there's a strong concept of change,
      >
      > Literally speaking, I can refactor something to make it more complex.
      >
      > I suppose that happens all the time.
      >
      > "normalization" implies "reduction" and "contraction".
      >

      ... because, from the point of view of both Mathematics and RDB
      theory,
      normalization implies neither reduction nor contraction, but
      bringing
      something into conformance with a precise set of criteria.

      Once you've normalized a database, adding a new table doesn't cause
      you to have to "re-normalize" the previous tables. OTOH, adding a
      method to an object (or another subclass to a class, etc.) may very
      well cause you to refactor existing code, which (to the sufficiently
      education-resistant) might imply that it hadn't been "factored"
      enough previously -- the old "think ahead, just in case" trap.

      I'd rather accept the burden of educating someone with a new term
      for
      a new concept, than risk the burden of overloading a term with
      existing
      connotations which might be misleading.

      -jn-
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.