Pattern Based Design
Chris via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Fri Nov 20 07:11:57 PST 2015
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 13:12:16 UTC, Ola Fosheim
> 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
>> 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.
Defining interfaces gets you only so far. As a program grows, you
have to change many things and redefine the interface later. What
looks like a good plan/interface when you set out, invariably
will have to be revised and changed later. This is the reality of
programming. No matter what they tell you about planning your
program beforehand, it changes later anyway, sometimes even
drastically. If anyone has the perfect plan, please let me know.
More information about the Digitalmars-d