Sorry, the previous person was Edward, and he is onto something with the
differences in opinion in the software world.

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Dereck Haskins
<[email protected]>wrote:

> I think Rakesh is on to something here.  There is a LOT of disagreement
> around best practices.
>
> However, I think within an organization you can tame the issues if you set
> the required code standards and follow them religiously.  Code reviews and
> Design reviews, though, are also really important if the standards are to
> have any meaning.
>
> I've thought a great deal about this, and I think we have to look outside
> CS to understand that others have dealt with complexity as well.  An Airbus
> or Boeing pilot doesn't have to keep everything in his/her head.  There are
> specific, short, and defined procedures for problems.
>
> Atul Gawande talks about the complexity of airline flying and surgical
> procedures in
> "The Checklist Manifesto".  I'm thinking more and more about this.  If
> computerized checklists guarantee communication and sequenced activities for
> the erection of a 35-story building, it could work for software projects as
> well.  Given, of course, that all team members agree to code standards and
> allow design and code reviews.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Rakesh <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> as we have seen many times before, even in these forums, devs just
>> can't seem to decide what the right way is to do something and reserve
>> the right to change it.
>>
>> So, last week I was arguing against changing established Java idioms
>> (like getters/setters) and lo and behold someone disagreed.
>>
>> Robert Martin (of Clean Code fame) advocates that a software developer
>> who does not use TDD is unprofessional. Many disagreed, one of them
>> was Cedric Buerst (of TestNG fame).
>>
>> So with such divergent views, and the corresponding variation in
>> quality of developers, I don't see how we can improve matters.
>>
>> The original example about passwords could be tackled by having some
>> centralised standard behaviour specification, but thats got nothing to
>> do with coding day by day.
>>
>> Rakesh
>>
>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Edward Gabriel Moraru
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hello.
>> >
>> > Maybe some participation in Software Craftsmanship movement could help ?
>> >
>> http://groups.google.com/group/software_craftsmanship/browse_thread/thread/4f9ddc74260faa78?hl=en
>> >
>> > Edward.
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Graham Allan <
>> [email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I generate passwords using KeepassX -- by default that includes
>> special
>> >> >characters. I gave up on that idea for websites. I can handle the
>> >> >rejection of a password, but I had more than one case where the
>> password
>> >> >was originally accepted, but then couldn't be used. In the most
>> extreme
>> >> >case they actually send me the password back via automated email
>> >> >triggered by the "Forgot password" link, but trying to log in with it
>> >> >just told me that username or password must be wrong.
>> >> >
>> >> >   Peter
>> >>
>> >> To me, the way that websites use slightly different, but tediously
>> >> enforced
>> >> rules, and that they all have to take on the burden for password
>> storage,
>> >> is
>> >> really detrimental to security. I wonder if a greater push for everyday
>> >> websites to use OpenID would counter the inconsistent and occasionally
>> >> incompetent attempts to 'do' usernames and passwords correctly.
>> Hopefully
>> >> any
>> >> security experts here could correct me if I'm wrong.
>> >>
>> >> ~ Graham
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups
>> >> "The Java Posse" group.
>> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> >> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
>> .
>> >> For more options, visit this group at
>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups
>> > "The Java Posse" group.
>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> > [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
>> .
>> > For more options, visit this group at
>> > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>> >
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "The Java Posse" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to