I received an email from Velocity rewards notifying me of a free upgrade to Gold membership. It was quickly followed up by another email containing the following.
Was it a human data input error or programming error?
Most software projects produce a mess and are a mess to manage. Projects that make it to production generally go on to a have a lifetime measured in years. While they are alive new projects are started, accumulating more mess. If the internal IT budget/group increases there is capacity to create an even bigger mess.
An obvious way to reduce the total mess, is for each project to be less messy. Unfortunately, there is little hope to do this at present due to the inherent nature of (current) organisations and the immaturity of software development in general. Another way is to do less software projects and make those smaller.
The business orientated technical managers I know seem to understand this at some level and are dealing with it by purchasing more off-the-shelf or outsourcing. This makes some of the costs of the mess more visible and attributable to (hopeful) benefits. However, it doesn't really address how poor we are at actually figuring out requirements, transforming them into usable, executable software and adapting to new requirements over time. With outsourcing, the mess is now less visible, but as a business relies on the systems and data, it will still experience similar effects from the mess over time.
From a purely technical perspective, does the world really need another bloated Java, Spring, Hibernate, Oracle, JUnit abomination application? Feel free to substitute other languages and libraries, such as Ruby and Rails, Groovy, etc.
Reduce the software mess. Do less software projects. Just say no!
I am looking for a native mac application that provides an easy interface to my Flickr account. Requirements:
Teaching for understanding didn't offset the destructive effects of telling them how to get the answer. Any step-by-step instruction in how to solve such problems put learners at a disadvantage; the absence of such instruction was required for them to understand.From: Education's Rotten Apples
-- Alfie Kohn
Been learning to use R for a stats subject. These links were useful.
I am using xUnit.net at work on an F# project. I wanted to incorporate FsCheck and check properties via xUnit.net, but there is no built-in integration. I tried this from Matthew Podwysocki, but it is out of date with respect to the versions I am using (xUnit.net 1.5, FsCheck 0.6.1).
EDIT 28/09/2009: Here is the new and improved version based on Kurt's comment.
module FsCheckXunit
open FsCheck
open FsCheck.Runner
open Xunit
let xUnitRunner =
{ new IRunner with
member x.OnArguments(_,_,_) = ()
member x.OnShrink(_,_) = ()
member x.OnFinished(name, result) =
match result with
| True data -> Assert.True(true)
| _ -> Assert.True(false, testFinishedToString name result)
}
let config = {quick with Runner = xUnitRunner}
module FsCheckXunit
open FsCheck
open FsCheck.Runner
open Xunit
let xUnitRunner =
{ new IRunner with
member x.OnArguments(_,_,_) = ()
member x.OnShrink(_,_) = ()
member x.OnFinished(name, result) =
match result with
| True data ->
Assert.True(true)
data.Stamps |> Seq.iter (fun x -> printfn "%d - %A" (fst x) (snd x))
| False (data,_,args,Exception e,_) ->
Assert.True(false, sprintf "%s - Falsifiable after %i tests (%i shrinks): %A with exception %O"
name data.NumberOfTests data.NumberOfShrinks args e)
| False (data,_,args,Timeout i,_) ->
Assert.True(false, sprintf "%s - Timeout of %i milliseconds exceeded after %i tests (%i shrinks): %A"
name i data.NumberOfTests data.NumberOfShrinks args)
| False (data,_,args,_,_) ->
Assert.True(false, sprintf "%s - Falsifiable after %i tests (%i shrinks): %A"
name data.NumberOfTests data.NumberOfShrinks args)
| Exhausted data -> Assert.True(false, sprintf "Exhausted after %d tests" (data.NumberOfTests) )
}
let config = {quick with Runner = xUnitRunner}
