Jay Kimble

Hopefully things start lookin' up for you at work! :)

Design Patterns are one of the things that really advanced my skills as a developer I think. It's like having the smartest developer around show you all his/her best secrets. Sure I may not understand them all right off the bat, or appreciate the context they're best suited for, but eventually, after a bit of trial and error, it clicks.

At first I was applying patterns in ways that didn't really make sense. It wasn't that I was trying to force pattern usage I think, so much as that I recognized a problem, and knew there was a pattern based solution, but couldn't confidentally say "this is the one". So you'd see Factories where Decorators would've been more appropriate. Stuff like that. I recently re-wrote something I wrote a year ago for example. The line-count is now half what it was, and it's a lot more flexible than it was before, with much more of it being meta-data driven. For that application, it finally clicked into place for me.

A lot of people would probably say my code still has a long way to go, but just imagine how bad it was before! :)

Anyways, keep it up, and don't let politics get ya down!

I'm in the same boat, I don't know jack about patterns. Although, I have started using the singleton pattern to store make certain items accessible accross an app (db connection string, etc) but I only picked it up do to diving into some of Paul Wilson's code. I guess I need to buy some more books. Sigh.

This patterns bullsh*t hype is really getting tiring... just code the stuff. Chances are, you won't care whether you used patterns or not because by the time you need to maintain your code, MS will have either obsoleted it with the flavor of the year, or the app will need to be re-written due to business pressure or not even needed anymore.

It's really amazing... this patterns hype didn't exist 4-5 years ago when we were churning out VB6/ASP apps that provided real value to business.

And please don't start the self-pity with TDD. Oy vey! Please, don't bring Java to .NET along with all the XP crap.

A while ago I found myself using the singleton patterna fair bit...until I discovered the ReaderWriterLock, this makes a nice replacement in a lot of circumstances. For a Singleton though, the best site I've seen is this: www.yoda.arachsys.com/.../singleton.html

Ahhh UniqueDesign....

I agree that in the past we did things on the fly.  I was a VB6/ASP Mort... I was a god back then you know...

Problem is that as I have looked at much of the code I have developed in my professional life it quickly became unmaintainable.  Learn OO should helpus build better apps and patterns reallyare about just figuring out different things you can do with the whole OO paradigm.

<old_tired_argument>As far as MS making thing obsolete... I have an old 486 you could use if you want... we have no problems with technology getting faster... for that matter why use VB6/ASP... back in the day Cobol rocked! and why stop there?  How about punch cards?  The issue is that technology evolves and those that don't evolve get left behind... whining doesn't solve it... being bitter won't help you either</old_tired_argument>

Uh wait... I used xml tags... do you guys think he'll understand them?

Design {atterns are more then just how to write code.  They are a great way to explain your problem space to a 3rd party that doesn't know the know your app.  I think the line in Fowler's book was that he just wanted to come up with a common language to express the different ways he was implementing some OO stuff.  Since a lot of what we do as coders is pretty repeatative, having a common name and description for solving a problem space sure makes it easier to communicate with others.

Design {atterns are more then just how to write code.  They are a great way to explain your problem space to a 3rd party that doesn't know the know your app.  I think the line in Fowler's book was that he just wanted to come up with a common language to express the different ways he was implementing some OO stuff.  Since a lot of what we do as coders is pretty repeatative, having a common name and description for solving a problem space sure makes it easier to communicate with others.

Don, that explains so much... I've wondered why others feel a need to document their own patterns... now it makes sense.

Careful about the DoFactory web site. They just repeated the Java patterns in C# form.  For example, the Observer pattern still uses an internal ArrayList and registration methods instead of delegates.

Maybe I'll have to write an interesting Design Patterns in .NET book.  :)

Ahh.. Mr. Kimble. Yes, I DO understand xml tags, unfortunately. ;-) Don't get me wrong, I'm not against patterns, I'm just against anyone feeling that their code is sh*t because they're not using an "official" design pattern. And being made to feel like a sh*t programmer by those who worship the almight pattern coming down from on high. Sorry, but a little too 133t <irony intentional> for my taste. Pulleez....

And no, I'm not the type to be dragged kicking and screaming into the "future" with new technologies; I do embrace change as I know it's part of our field. I just don't digest all the hype without reading the ingredients, that's all. Even though you have to use stuff you may not agree with. After-all, if business wants, business gets and I'm smart enough to follow the money.

UP: The only reason that design patterns are getting any hype is because the Softies discovered that there are many ways to shoot yourself in the foot with the .NET framework. They made C# too much like C++ and made it possible to write horrendously bad code. ;)

Rather than try to teach people to use common sense when coding and teach them to really understand what's going on under the covers, they started preaching design patterns. Heck, Rob Howard even went as far as to re-name the object factory the "provider factory" so it would have a Softie stamp on it. Yeah, yeah "it's more like a strategy/factory/singleton combination man, that makes it unique". Whatever floats your boat I guess. I've got the GoF book beside me here, copyright 1995. I've got "Patterns in Java" here too, copyight 1998.  The general Microsoft programming public are johnny-come-latelys to design patterns. Mainly because VB didn't really support them. I've worked on code where a C++ guy "implemented" an object factory in VB using interfaces. It was an abomination. Now that mainstream Microsoft "Mort" languages support patterns, more people are interested in them and acting like they are the end all be all. Argh, maybe I should take this rant over to my site. ;)

If you're a smart programmer, you're probably using them without even knowing.

Thanks Scott...

Inadvertantly (or maybe on purpose) you've made me feel even better... maybe I don't need to read the GoF book...

There I go again trusting someone I don't all know... <sigh>

Actually Scott is a regular commenter around here

Actually, I'm not a big fan of the GoF book.  Seems way to abstract for my tastes, but I understand why some people like it.  Me, I'd rather have Fowler's Patterns of Enterprise Arch and/or the DDD book on my desk while I'm designing code.

>  I think the line in Fowler's book was that he just wanted to come up with a common language to express the different ways he was implementing some OO stuff

We have that, it's called "a programming language". They're just not good enough yet:

www.codinghorror.com/.../000308.html