Re: Development as Configuration

Kenneth Downs wrote:
>

http://news.com.com/BEA+reaches+beyond+Java+roots/2100-1012_3-5690118.html?tag=nefd.top
>
> Here is a choice quote:
>
> "But rather than write Java to build applications, the forthcoming
BEA line
> will allow a person to assemble a program with visual tools and
minimal
> coding, Roth said. "You bring applications together by configuration,
not
> necessarily coding," he said."

ugh.
On the one hand we want to bump up some levels so we are using objects of types that are more compex than Strings and ints and so we are not hand-coding such things as threading logic every time we write an application. On the other hand, we should retire one-way code generation for developers. Bea might be talking about round-trip tools here, but there is no reason to think so from the above quote.

I am no longer interested in any visual tools or spec'ing tools in the entire process of software development (UI, DB, etc) where there is no round trip with underlying code. Even with round-trip tools, I'm primarily interested in the direction from code to UML, screen shots, and other visuals for development of quality software and the direction from pictures to code for prototypes.

My opinion is based on experience, however, without any research on the cost of maintaining generated code over time, which typically includes being (at least somewhat) locked into the code generator tools.

In the Bea/Sun/IBM wars for the Java IDE of choice, it sounds like IBM is winning (although I use NetBeans or none). Bea had an early lead and needs to do something spectacular to stay in the running, I suspect, so I'll be interested to see if their approach takes off. Maybe it is better than it sounds.
--dawn Received on Sat Apr 30 2005 - 18:27:54 CEST