Вагиф Абилов (object) wrote,
Вагиф Абилов
object

Сполски против Мартина

Джоэл Сполски обрушился на "дядю Боба" Мартина. Причем градус флейма приближается к градусу политдискуссий в ЖЖ.

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/01/31.html

Ответ Роберта Мартина: http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2009/02/06/on-open-letter-to-joel-spolsky-and-jeff-atwood

Имхо, Сполски, увлекаясь, способен договориться до всякой ерунды. Вот, например, его критика принципа SRP:

"One of the SOLID principles, and I'm totally butchering this, but, one of the principles was that you shouldn't have two things in the same class that would be changed for a different reason. Like, you don't want to have an Employee class, because it's got his name which might get changed if he gets married, and it has his salary, which might get changed if he gets a raise. Those have to be two separate classes, because they get changed under different circumstances. And you wind up with millions of tiny little classes, like the EmployeeSalary class, and it's just... (laughs) idiotic! You can't build software that way! The way real software works is that you create these very imperfect things, and they work great. They really do. And then you have a little problem, and you go and you fix the little problem, because it's code, and you have an editor, and you edit it. These classes are not going to go wander off flying in the universe all by themselves and need to work perfectly and unchanged until the end of time."

Вот даже странно, что он способен сказать такое: "The way real software works is that you create these very imperfect things, and they work great." Простительно было двадцать лет назад, когда хорошие программы писались в одиночку. Уже десять лет назад это было непростительно.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 79 comments