Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #18297

Re: D'oh! Oh, for lack of a code review.

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/22/2014 6:59 PM, Don Y wrote:
> On 9/22/2014 3:48 PM, rickman wrote:
>> On 9/21/2014 11:16 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>> On 9/21/2014 5:28 PM, Paul E Bennett wrote:
>>>> I like Tim's idea of forming Code Review Circles, which is one way of
>>>> keeping the "Lone Wolf Developer" from going too insane. Fortunately I
>>>> have
>>>> a few friends that will help review material for me (documents as
>>>> well as
>>>> code and drawings). I do similar for them too. It is part of what
>>>> networking
>>>> is all about.
>>>
>>> I think this is only practical in "dense" areas -- and, only with
>>> contractors.
>>> Folks who have 9-to-5's tend to want to leave work behind at 5 (and
>>> would
>>> probably not be compensated to do this sort of thing on the company's
>>> dime!)
>>>
>>> You can do this "long distance" but in my experiences, it loses a lot of
>>> the intimacy and energy that "in person" reviews seem to exhibit.  And,
>>> a lot more gets overlooked (because of the "cost" of bringing someone's
>>> attention to an issue -- wondering if everyone else has already made a
>>> similar observation).
>>>
>>> It's *really* nice to have a bunch of heads looking at the *same*
>>> thing...
>>> knowing where each other's gaze/focus is drifting, etc.
>>>
>>> It's a LOT easier to do hardware reviews remotely.  Especially with
>>> interactive video, etc.  "Everything" is visible at one time -- to
>>> everyone, etc.
>>
>> These days hardware *is* software.  The last company I worked for had
>> the FPGA
>> people in the software department.
>
> You can far more easily represent a piece of hardware on a "unified
> drawing"
> than you can with software.  So, you can provide a "block/functional
> diagram"
> that allows everyone to see the overall structure of a circuit; then, delve
> into selected "subsections" as appropriate.

As a general rule this is nonsense.  Drawings are great for the things 
drawing are good for.  But when a system gets very complex you can't put 
enough detail in a top level drawing for it to be worth a damn.  The 
decomposition is important.

There is nothing wrong with drawings.  They are great where they work. 
But to say that means it has to be hardware is silly.  Software can 
utilize drawings as well.


> Tools (and "thought processes") for doing this with a piece of software
> just don't exist in widespread use.

More nonsense.  I have personally used a number of such tools.


> This is why software is considerably harder to document, describe, analyze
> (in an isolated human brain), etc.

Unsubstantiated nonesense.

> *When* adequate tools (and methodologies) exist to provide (and are
> adopted)
> these same sorts of "illustrations" that allow entire software systems
> to be
> "conceptualized" in such a terse, abstract manner, I suspect there will be
> a quantum leap in software reliability, etc.

Only *simple* things can be abstracted simply.  It has nothing to do 
with hardware vs. software.


>      "Why is this module talking to this *other* module?  Is that
> intentional?
>      It *smells* like a potential problem area... let's take a look inside
>      those two modules!"

What does this have to do with hardware vs. software?  Both hardware and 
software have modules.  I can't even tell which this is about!

-- 

Rick

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2014-09-21 16:23 -0500
  Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2014-09-22 09:02 +1000
    Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2014-09-22 00:21 +0000
      Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2014-09-22 10:58 +1000
        Re: D'oh! Oh, for lack of a code review. Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-09-21 22:28 -0500
      Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-09-21 22:16 -0400
    Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-09-22 01:28 +0100
      Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-21 20:16 -0700
        Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Bruce Varley - 2014-09-22 11:51 +0800
          Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-21 21:19 -0700
        Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-09-22 22:20 +0100
          Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-22 16:28 -0700
            Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-09-23 00:43 -0400
        Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-09-22 18:48 -0400
          Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-22 15:59 -0700
            Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-09-23 00:49 -0400
    Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-22 16:15 -0700
      Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-22 16:30 -0700
  Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-09-22 10:22 +0200
  Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2014-09-22 19:08 +0200
    Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2014-09-22 13:59 -0500
      Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-09-22 12:18 -0700
        Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. tim <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2014-09-23 00:27 -0500
          Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-09-23 18:35 -0500
      Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-09-22 21:26 +0200
  Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> - 2014-09-22 16:24 -0700
    Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-09-22 16:34 -0700
    Re: D'oh!  Oh, for lack of a code review. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-09-23 01:11 -0400

csiph-web