Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, David Starr wrote:
> If a company is building its 15th X and has 'experts' who deeply understand
> the problem domain of X, then there are benefits that can be achieved from
> an 'engineered' approach. I don't know if Al works in this sort of an
> environment. But this is certainly an environment where an 'engineered'
> approach can be better suited to a rapidly changing requirements, etc.
Oddly enough, we are pushing technical boundaries and having things
changing under our feet all the time, but I've seperated the fundamental
essence of the system (basic data model and large scale control flow) out
in my head and made the code modular, so the little modules that do stuff
people actually see can come and go happily. We've already thrown out
various modules that never saw the light of day, either due to
reimplementation or due to their function being subsumed by a more generic
So I guess this is a hybrid system; I've engineered the overall
architecture as a modular thing over the project lifetimescale, then I
engineer modules within it from week to week...
...but I still think of it in terms of engineering things, I think that's
how I'm wired :-)
Alaric B. Snell
http://www.alaric-snell.com/ http://RFC.net/ http://www.warhead.org.uk/
Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software