Pattern Based Design

Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at
Wed Nov 18 05:12:13 PST 2015

On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 02:41:33 UTC, Jonny wrote:
> I am mainly talking about the organizational aspects of higher 
> level of abstraction rather than code generation.
> Basically dealing with "files" is so old school. They reduce 
> coherence of the abstraction. Modules help but still are file 
> based.
> I'd rather have a list of functions, a hierarchical view of 
> class relationships(the uml like design).
> I'd like to see the project on a higher level of abstraction 
> instead of the very concrete "files" approach that hasn't 
> changed since punch cards.

Yes, I agree with you. I've felt the same way for a long time. 
Unfortunately it is very hard and expensive to build such tools. 
They exist and are in use, but in very specific domains.

One of the key problem with the concept is that programmers often 
edit and mutate their programs with many unfinished pieces laying 
around before they compile. If they started by defining 
interfaces then it would be a lot easier to make a good tool.

But if you look at reactive/dataflow programming you'll find 
advanced tools that have been in production use: animation, 
audio/dsp, control systems for critical systems etc.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list