Re: pattern languages

From: Phlip (phlip_cpp_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/31/04 

Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 05:18:57 GMT

Michael G wrote:

> >> ...And I have been exposed to a host of patterns but
> >> little real process.
> >
> > Even if you didn't mean "progress" there, have you tried /Refactoring to
> > Patterns/, by Josh K., yet?
> >
> > It goes with /Working Effectively with Legacy Code/ by Mike F. in terms
of
> > improving how we use (and disabuse) patterns.
>
> I did mean process. :-)
>
> No I haven't but thanks. At this point I am more interested in development
> than legacy code. My master's thesis touches on the "no process" aspect of
> patterns. I introduce a couple "design constructs." It is nothing earth
> shattering but in a small way what I am doing is significant.

The former book is useful for non-legacy code, because if you can't refactor
towards the pattern you envision ... is it valid for your situation?

The latter is useful because "legacy" can be viewed as a metaphor for
hard-to-test situations. 

-- 
  Phlip
  http://industrialxp.org/community/bin/view/Main/TestFirstUserInterfaces