A great article on what Gene Shadrin calls the OO Design Pyramid: [sys-con.com]
The references of this articles might not be enough to infer Shadrin's concept of the OO Design Pyramid, and I'm not sure where he obtained his data for Figure 3 (Design Time vs. Design Flaw), but on the surface I believe this is a fantastic representation of Object Oriented Design in an easy to understand, structured form.
Shadrin present a number of plausible ideas here. Using basic concepts without patterns will probably cause an architect to eventually design to patterns, which takes much longer. Designing with patterns but without the basic concepts typically leads to confusion and no "glue" between the patterns. I have read the Gang of Four books, several Fowler books, and others, and have seen them demonstrate the necessity of lower layer concepts with design patterns, but not the other way around. I really feel Shadrin has something here.
The references of this articles might not be enough to infer Shadrin's concept of the OO Design Pyramid, and I'm not sure where he obtained his data for Figure 3 (Design Time vs. Design Flaw), but on the surface I believe this is a fantastic representation of Object Oriented Design in an easy to understand, structured form.
Shadrin present a number of plausible ideas here. Using basic concepts without patterns will probably cause an architect to eventually design to patterns, which takes much longer. Designing with patterns but without the basic concepts typically leads to confusion and no "glue" between the patterns. I have read the Gang of Four books, several Fowler books, and others, and have seen them demonstrate the necessity of lower layer concepts with design patterns, but not the other way around. I really feel Shadrin has something here.
Comments
Post a Comment