tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14853042.post112867674429288645..comments2024-02-06T20:44:32.502+05:30Comments on One Man Hacking: I.need(true).someMoney();Ravihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03630087669712445498noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14853042.post-1129085847297494222005-10-12T08:27:00.000+05:302005-10-12T08:27:00.000+05:30Nate,You said,"I agree that you shouldn't sacrific...Nate,<BR/>You said,<BR/>"I agree that you shouldn't sacrifice good object design for English readable "sentences", but the two are not mutually exclusive"<BR/><BR/>I agree. What I oppose(d) is the desire to have code read like English at the expense of good design,and with an explicit intent to avoid "developerspeak". <BR/><BR/>In the discussion I referred to, the argument for "Should.be(true).blah" etc was based soleley on the "English -like" nature of the resulting sentence.<BR/><BR/>By that principle the "eq" in teh example you give would be rejected as "not enough like English" and be replaced by something like "Should.makeEqual(something, other)" which in <EM>my opinion</EM> is nonsense.<BR/><BR/>As I pointed out in the very first sentence, it is not the principle of "code whould be redable" that is at fault. It is when this principle is understood to mean "code should read like English at any cost" that problems arise.Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03630087669712445498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14853042.post-1129076222628661432005-10-12T05:47:00.000+05:302005-10-12T05:47:00.000+05:30I agree that you shouldn't sacrifice good object d...I agree that you shouldn't sacrifice good object design for English readable "sentences", but the two are not mutually exclusive. Something like (recently brought into my project)<BR/><BR/>assertThat(something, eq(someOther))<BR/><BR/>reads very nicely and seems to belong to a Test class. In some cases, the syntax niceties (such as eq, which is a JMock Condition) are statically imported to clean up the readability a bit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14853042.post-1128715380713965502005-10-08T01:33:00.000+05:302005-10-08T01:33:00.000+05:30Joe, run.away(fast).and.hide(true)heh heh nice!As ...Joe,<BR/><BR/> run.away(fast).and.hide(true)<BR/><BR/>heh heh nice!<BR/><BR/>As to the framework,no iam NOT joking. Keep watching the "tech space".Ravihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03630087669712445498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14853042.post-1128686770694242632005-10-07T17:36:00.000+05:302005-10-07T17:36:00.000+05:30Ravi,You might be a very good programmer overall b...Ravi,<BR/><BR/>You might be a very good programmer overall but you still need to master the finer points of OO Design.<BR/><BR/>Every instance of class ThinkingProgrammer has a method called <BR/><BR/> run.away(fast).and.hide(true)<BR/><BR/>which should be invoked when you meet such morons.<BR/><BR/>Hilarious! I am sending the permalink url to all my friends. <BR/>:-)<BR/><BR/> you ARE joking about that framework?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com