Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #10103

Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies

From	Novice <novice@example..com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies
Date	2011-11-20 17:08 +0000
Organization	Your Company
Message-ID	<Xns9FA37B944799jpnasty@94.75.214.39> (permalink)
References	<Xns9FA29593FF4C2jpnasty@94.75.214.39> <p4_xq.30508$Pm3.8310@newsfe12.iad>

Show all headers | View raw

Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> wrote in
news:p4_xq.30508$Pm3.8310@newsfe12.iad: 

> You could probably do worse than to read
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_development_methodology. This is
> of value primarily because it introduces a lot of common terminology.
> 
> Ultimately _every_ software development methodology (SDM) boils down
> to: 
> 
> 1. requirements analysis - understanding what the client needs you to
> do; 2. analysis & design - how you intend to meet those needs. See
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_analysis_and_design,
> since we are talking Java, for general concepts;
> 3. implementation - actually write code;
> 4. testing - ensuring that your code, as written, satisfies the
> requirements;
> 5. maintenance - nurturing the application over its lifespan.
> 
> How all the various approaches differ is how they break up and
> sequence these activities. What really matters is that all these
> activities are important.
> 
> It's probably best not to fixate on any given methodology. Just learn
> up on the highlights of each, and keep in mind that all of them
> ultimately boil down to requiring competence in the same skills. You'd
> be interested initially in object-oriented analysis (OOA),
> object-oriented design (OOD), and how to test your code (starting with
> unit testing and perhaps functional testing).
> 
> Like Arne suggested, "Effective Java" by Bloch is a great book. So is
> "Code Complete". IMO I wouldn't bother buying a copy of the GOF design
> patterns book; borrow from a university library or locate a decent
> website instead. Read some Martin Fowler
> (http://martinfowler.com/intro.html). Don't get hung up on specific
> methodologies (did I say that already?) - no project ever succeeded or
> failed just because of what methodology a team used. Get some
> familiarity with UML but don't go overboard with it.
> 
> My own specific suggestion - read
> http://www.agilemodeling.com/artifacts/crcModel.htm (Scott Ambler is
> also a good author). CRC is not just useful in agile.
> 
> If your understanding of persistence (databases) is not solid - in
> your estimation, bone up on that.
> 
> If you don't have one already, select another OO programming language
> to learn. You can make a lot more headway in learning all of the above
> if you're not tied to one specific language. Just my opinion.
> 
Thanks, Arved. Lots of great suggestions, tempered with common sense like 
not getting fixated on any specific methodology. 

A couple of followup questions if I may. 
1. I'm pretty solid on relational databases, although not OO databases. 
I'm not clear on the actual purpose of "persistence layers" though. I 
started to look at Hibernate a few years back but got sidetracked and 
didn't get very far. Can you possibly summarize in a few sentences:
a. what a persistence layer does 
b. how an OO database differs from a relational database?

I'm also intrigued to hear you suggest looking at another OO language as 
a way to learn more about OO in general. Interesting idea. Like learning 
French to help improve your Spanish, to use a non-computer metaphor.I did 
dabble in C++ briefly after I had the basics of C but then discovered 
that C++ was not easily portable across platforms. That's when I was sold 
(brainwashed?) into looking at Java ;-)

What other OO language would be best to consider? C++? Smalltalk? .NET? 
(Hmm, I'm not sure if .NET is even considered OO....)


-- 
Novice

Thread

Standard Design and Development Methodologies Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-11-19 19:42 +0000
  Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-19 21:22 -0500
    Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-11-20 16:55 +0000
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies "Charles Hottel" <chottel@earthlink.net> - 2011-11-20 22:20 -0500
  Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-19 23:01 -0400
    Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-19 20:13 -0800
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-19 20:16 -0800
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies "Derek K. Wodenhouse" <dkw@none.of.your.biz> - 2011-11-19 23:49 -0500
        Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-19 23:45 -0800
          Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies "Derek K. Wodenhouse" <dkw@none.of.your.biz> - 2011-11-20 03:49 -0500
            Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-11-20 13:58 +0100
            Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-20 08:32 -0800
              Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies "Derek K. Wodenhouse" <dkw@none.of.your.biz> - 2011-11-20 18:24 -0500
        Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-11-20 03:27 -0800
          Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies spk <jhic@speak.invalid> - 2011-11-20 09:54 -0400
            Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-20 08:33 -0800
            Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-11-20 18:30 -0500
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-20 09:35 -0400
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-11-20 17:18 +0000
        Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-20 10:30 -0800
          Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-21 07:23 -0400
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-25 21:51 -0500
        Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-25 20:07 -0800
    Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-11-20 17:08 +0000
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-20 12:18 -0500
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-20 10:29 -0800
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-20 10:55 -0800
        Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-20 14:07 -0500
          Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-20 11:50 -0800
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-21 07:19 -0400
  Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-20 22:27 -0800
    Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-21 07:02 -0400
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-11-22 18:52 +0100
        Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-22 11:37 -0800
          Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-22 14:27 -0800
            Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-25 22:06 -0500
              Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-26 21:16 -0800
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-02 21:53 -0500
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-04 21:25 -0800
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-05 22:41 -0500
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-05 19:58 -0800
          Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-22 19:57 -0400
            Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-25 22:04 -0500
              Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-26 21:18 -0800
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-27 08:34 -0400
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-11-27 08:39 -0800
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-11-27 20:07 +0000
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-02 21:48 -0500
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-12-03 14:52 -0400
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-05 22:50 -0500
                Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-12-06 07:21 -0400
      Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-25 21:54 -0500
    Re: Standard Design and Development Methodologies Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-25 21:47 -0500

csiph-web