Problems? Is your data what you think it is? | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Monks, In a moment of honest self-reflection, I realized that most of the software I've worked on over my past year and a half of employment fits the Big Ball of Mud pattern. Much of my code started off as either a throwaway or a prototype, which I never quite had the time to rewrite later. Some of it (the minority, I think) is a maintenance minefield. That said, some of it's fairly good, well-documented, loosely coupled, easy to maintain code. Should I be concerned that my code doesn't fit the Gang
of Four's vision of architectural sophistication? Are
design patterns all they're reported to be, or even close?
None of these programs Am I admitting that I have a problem, or just being paranoid? What experiences have you had? -- In reply to Are design patterns worth it? by FoxtrotUniform
|
|