Timeline for Clarify the Single Responsibility Principle
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2016 at 22:46 | comment | added | kiwicomb123 | Sorry, I added that comment before it was finished, (can't seem to edit it now). That google doc I am using as my method for design. It follows a top-down design, test up using TDD, methodology. (Basically the V model). Any input about how my methodology might be improved would be greatly appreciated, I find this area of software development fascinating. | |
| Dec 3, 2016 at 22:39 | comment | added | kiwicomb123 | Really? I agree with the idea of avoiding feature bloat. I thought YAGNI was a similar idea, but in regard to class level design. It is tough not to generalize ideas to other levels of abstraction. I am working on a google document to help me form a strategy for design location here: docs.google.com/document/d/… | |
| Dec 3, 2016 at 22:29 | comment | added | candied_orange | Actually yagni can be pushed to far as well. It's really meant to keep you from implementing speculative use cases. Not to keep you from isolating an implemented use case. | |
| Dec 3, 2016 at 22:12 | comment | added | kiwicomb123 | Okay, I understand, it violates the "your not gona need it" principle. | |
| Dec 3, 2016 at 22:01 | comment | added | candied_orange | because it won't help, won't be complete, and there are more effective ways to deal with change than to try to predict it. Just expect it. Isolate decisions and the impact will be minimal. | |
| Dec 3, 2016 at 21:24 | comment | added | kiwicomb123 | Why should we not be making a list of most likely changes? Speculative design? | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 4:53 | comment | added | candied_orange | One reason to change has nothing to do with the number of use cases, actors, or how likely a change is. You should not be making a list of likely changes. It is correct that one change should only impact one class. Being able to extend a class to accommodate that change is good, but that's the open closed principle, not SRP. | |
| Jul 3, 2016 at 3:18 | review | Late answers | |||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 6:28 | |||||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 3:05 | review | First posts | |||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 6:30 | |||||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 3:02 | history | answered | kiwicomb123 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |