|
From: | David Bradley |
Subject: | Re: [DotGNU]flexible for users, or flexible for developers? (wasRe:User Interfaces) |
Date: | Tue, 09 Jul 2002 17:36:48 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0rc2) Gecko/20020512 Netscape/7.0b1 |
Timothy Rue wrote:
However if the filling of the dots is not efficient or unreliable it makes for a rather poor holodeck program. Someone has to do the boring work of polishing that code. I wouldn't expect an applications developer to go in and work on system level code, but someone has to go and work in that code. Another issue is the lack of design. IMO it looks as if more people are happy to jump in and start coding without much design, because design isn't "fun" and seen as a hindrance. Some of these people are very smart, and create good works. However they aren't happy to stay there and maintain their work, they move on. For the poor sole that has to work on it, it can be a real pain trying to figure it out. It's not to say that it's a bad work, just that it's complex and without supporting documentation difficult to maintain. There seem to be little standards in place for encouraging people to fully document the work they've done.something that should be automated. To use an analogy, when programming a holodeck scene, must the programmer manually fill in the details all the way down to the grain of wood on a table leg? But wouldn't that be boring for someone who simply wants to play in the holodeck?
David Bradley (Not the guy on the IBM commercial)
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |