Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Martin Fowler has taken a look [martinfowler.com] and doesn't like what he sees...

    -Dom

    • Well duh. That's like Dave Rolsky taking a look at "101 Ways to Torture Bunny Rabbits" and not liking what he sees. Fowler's an XP low-process guy. The SWEBOK is all about process.

      --Nat

      • While I appreciate being used as an analogy, I'd hope that pretty much anyone who looked at "101 Ways to Torture Bunny Rabbits" would dislike such a thing. I doubt I'm unique in this respect ;)
      • Oh, I agree. But more than I care about either lots of process or little process, my main complaint from reading about it is that it might be forced onto people as the One True Way. I guess I was alarmed by reading about it being made into some kind of "legal" thing. Not that it'd probably affect me as a non-US citizen.

        -Dom

        P.S. Bunny make good pie!

      • Well, that's an unfair dismissal of Fowler's dislike of SWEBOK.

        If you read his commentary (it's very brief), he dislikes the SWEBOK because the field is both too young and too broad to have a formed a generally accepted view of "what works". Plus, it's definition of the "body of knowledge" is needlessly shallow, and excludes things like the Gang of Four.

        • the field is both too young and too broad to have a formed a generally accepted view of "what works"

          That's nonsense. People have been studying software engineering since the 70s. I agree completely that the idea that there's anything that works in software engineering other than luck is optimistic, but the disciplines that SWEBOK describes (requirements, testing, SCM, etc.) are valid and mature.

          The big problem, I think, is that SWEBOK manages to be tedious and pointlessly theoretical about topics tha