Today after our planning game I did a short poll on how the guys perceive test driven development and pair programming. We're trying to do both for some time now, and since I take the blame for introducing both practices, I feel I'm somewhat - um - preoccupied on that matter. A few days ago, I was caught totally off guard when Richard told me that, well, he doesn't believe programming in pairs is more productive. Bummer. And I had believed my show to be grand circus.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Understanding The Fuzz About Engineering In Software Development
Steve McConnell responds to Eric Wise's article Rejecting Software Engineering that Rumors of Software Engineering's Death are Greatly Exaggerated". There's a lot of fuzz about the usage of the word "engineering" when it comes to software development. What's this all about?
According to wikipedia, engineering is defined by the ECPD as
When I look at this definition I don't really see anything that would not be applicable to software development. Steve McConnell generously points out that software engineering is recognized and practiced for some time now, so where does this new-fashioned stubborn refusal to call the child by it's name come from?
The real problem comes to light when you look at the engineering process. You'll find a description of the engineering process on wikipedia. The article describes the engineering process in four stages:
Now there are some engineers who map the engineering stages to software development in a rather funny way: They think that "Design" is the process of drawing good looking UML diagrams and that "Realize" is "Coding". When you look at the wikipedia article, you'll see that for engineers "Realize" stands for "Manufacturing". In a software context, manufacturing means running the compiler and pressing some CDs or deploying some binary over the Internet.
So when engineers claim that software developers should look at how engineers do their design and all this talk about software processes would be settled once and for all, they're ignoring that software development is a design-only activity and that software has a lot less problems with the "Realization" stage than traditional engineering.
When a software developer writes code she is building an executable, mathematical model of reality.
When software developers prefer not to use the title "engineer" to describe what they're doing, they're trying to avoid a mapping of the engineering process onto the software development process that is wrong. In the end, software developers will build mathematical models (source code) and apply scientific methods (complexity analysis) to solve problems. If this is not engineering, than we're not engineers.
What is engineering?
According to wikipedia, engineering is defined by the ECPD as
The creative application of scientific principles to design or develop structures, machines, apparatus, or manufacturing processes, or works utilizing them singly or in combination; or to construct or operate the same with full cognizance of their design; or to forecast their behavior under specific operating conditions; all as respects an intended function, economics of operation and safety to life and property.
When I look at this definition I don't really see anything that would not be applicable to software development. Steve McConnell generously points out that software engineering is recognized and practiced for some time now, so where does this new-fashioned stubborn refusal to call the child by it's name come from?
The engineering process
The real problem comes to light when you look at the engineering process. You'll find a description of the engineering process on wikipedia. The article describes the engineering process in four stages:
- Conceive
- Design
- Realize
- Service
Now there are some engineers who map the engineering stages to software development in a rather funny way: They think that "Design" is the process of drawing good looking UML diagrams and that "Realize" is "Coding". When you look at the wikipedia article, you'll see that for engineers "Realize" stands for "Manufacturing". In a software context, manufacturing means running the compiler and pressing some CDs or deploying some binary over the Internet.
So when engineers claim that software developers should look at how engineers do their design and all this talk about software processes would be settled once and for all, they're ignoring that software development is a design-only activity and that software has a lot less problems with the "Realization" stage than traditional engineering.
When a software developer writes code she is building an executable, mathematical model of reality.
Conclusion
When software developers prefer not to use the title "engineer" to describe what they're doing, they're trying to avoid a mapping of the engineering process onto the software development process that is wrong. In the end, software developers will build mathematical models (source code) and apply scientific methods (complexity analysis) to solve problems. If this is not engineering, than we're not engineers.
Friday, June 29, 2007
How You Can Start Improving Your Software Process Today
Are you a developer who dreams about a better software development process in the organization you work for? Maybe you read something about fancy practices on your favorite blog or mayhap you even touched one of those old-style paper collections called books? Do you have some concrete ideas on how to improve, but don't know how to start? I was in the same situation a year ago. Here's what I did and what I would do differently today.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Today The Test Suite Broke
When I arrived at work today I fired up Outlook and checked my mail. I found five mails from our auto-build server telling me that the build broke. Since we introduced test driven development and continuous integration only a short time ago this was not out of nowhere - the build usually breaks at least once a day.
But today was the first day a unit test broke since we introduced TDD and CI.
But today was the first day a unit test broke since we introduced TDD and CI.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Ubuntu Gutsy Ximeta NDAS Howto
A month ago I bought a TREKSTOR NDAS device. This devices promises on it's package to be linux compatible. So after I unpacked the hardware and everything was running in Windows I tried to install it in linux. Unfortunately the stock feisty debian package I found didn't work with my WLAN configuration.
Now after I reinstalled ubuntu and upgraded to gutsy which comes right now with a 2.6.22er kernel I tried to build the driver from source. I had to patch the sources to make it work, but since it works flawlessly right now I provide my patch and a little compilation howto.
Download the current NDAS sources and my NDAS patch for linux kernel 2.6.22.
After that you can start the NDAS service by issuing
Configure your device by following the Ximeta NDAS driver documentation.
Now after I reinstalled ubuntu and upgraded to gutsy which comes right now with a 2.6.22er kernel I tried to build the driver from source. I had to patch the sources to make it work, but since it works flawlessly right now I provide my patch and a little compilation howto.
Download the current NDAS sources and my NDAS patch for linux kernel 2.6.22.
# installed some packages. I don't know which exactly, but you'll need
# at least the following:
apt-get install build-essential checkinstall linux-headers-generic
# extract and patch the ndas sources...
tar xvzf /path/to/ndas-1.1-2.tar.gz
cd ndas-1.1-2
patch -p1 < /path/to/ndas-1.1-2_kernel-2.22.patch
# you only need to set NDAS_KERNEL_VERSION if you
# don't want to compile ndas for the currently running
# kernel for example, if you're compling from within colinux
NDAS_KERNEL_VERSION=2.6.22-6-generic
make
# ndas_root must be exported for make install and
# checkinstall to work
export ndas_root=$(pwd)
# somehow I had to make install before checkinstall...
# this is no problem, since checkinstall will clean up
# the whole mess again
sudo make install
sudo checkinstall
After that you can start the NDAS service by issuing
/etc/init.d/ndas start
Configure your device by following the Ximeta NDAS driver documentation.
Friday, June 8, 2007
Mobile Ubuntu Colinux Setup
My Vista Home Premium finally arrived. Since I have a Ati 9250 at work, which is a smartly rebranded DirectX 8 card, I was craving for the full "vista experience". After doing some backup I installed Vista on my laptop and spent some time setting up the basic programs I need. Since installing colinux is one of the great challenges of the Game Of Windows I'll try to present you a step-by-step guide to a working mobile colinux setup in Vista.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
IT Security: YOU Are The Weakest Link
There is a single most important rule to IT security:
Always address the weakest link.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)