A Perspective on D from game industry

Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed Jun 18 01:21:47 PDT 2014


"deadalnix"  wrote in message news:qawhxkzqdgzjwylzrhdf at forum.dlang.org...

> I call them architecture astronautes. To avoid that pitfall, I have a 
> adopted the following method :
>   - Do whatever you need to to get to the next step toward you goal.
>   - Make a pause and observe. Is there some repeated patterns ? Is there 
> some part of the code that is growing in complexity ? Do part of the code 
> rely on fragile hacks ? Is part of the code doing useless work ? etc...
>   - If yes, refactor accordingly, either by adding new level of 
> abstraction, but better, by changing the interface of some abstraction to 
> better fit its actual usage (and not the you were thinking you'd get at 
> first).
>
> This allowed me to avoid creating useless abstraction, and push me to 
> refine existing ones.

This is exactly the approach I use and I've found the extra time spent on 
refactoring is well worth the time saved on not implementing things you 
don't need or that don't match the needs of the problem you're solving.
It does help that D is rather easy to refactor, and I'm much better at 
coming up with a good design after I've half-implemented it. 



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list