Abstract and often ambiguous diagrams will never make up for real code. Never.
There are far too many "architects" who sit there all day drawing out massive diagrams of software systems, adding complexity that isn't needed, and in the end still not providing something that's usable.
You could fire those architects, hire some good developers, and actually get a software product developed, tested and in the field, well before those architects have "perfected" their "designs".
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Wednesday June 23, 2010 @01:23PM (#32667320)
Software architecture isn't like designing buildings or machinery. It's misleading and unproductive to think that it is
* Weinberg's Second Law: If Builders Built Buildings The Way Programmers Write Programs, Then The First Woodpecker That Came Along Would Destroy Civilization.
Diagrams will never make up for real code. (Score:-1, Offtopic)
Abstract and often ambiguous diagrams will never make up for real code. Never.
There are far too many "architects" who sit there all day drawing out massive diagrams of software systems, adding complexity that isn't needed, and in the end still not providing something that's usable.
You could fire those architects, hire some good developers, and actually get a software product developed, tested and in the field, well before those architects have "perfected" their "designs".
Software architecture isn't like des
Re:Diagrams will never make up for real code. (Score:2, Informative)
Software architecture isn't like designing buildings or machinery. It's misleading and unproductive to think that it is
* Weinberg's Second Law: If Builders Built Buildings The Way Programmers Write Programs, Then The First Woodpecker That Came Along Would Destroy Civilization.