Comments by "yapdog" (@yapdog) on "What Software Architecture Should Look Like" video.

  1. Yet another truly informative video! Thanx, Dave :^) I equate software architecture to writing novels. There are plotters and there are pantsers. Pantsers start the story at the beginning and write forward. The story goes wherever is most interesting, ideally; i.e. the story is "discovered." Sounds wrong-headed and can lead to disaster but can be useful on small projects (I wouldn't take that approach, tho). Plotters can be thought of as software architects/designers, combining elements (characters, places, objects, relationships, etc.) to define the flow of the story from a bird's eye view. However, in my experience, this can also get people into trouble if the writer views the plot as a "bible" from which never to deviate. In this sense, plot is design, but the various elements (e.g. libraries, formats, protocols, etc.) used in the plot define architecture In writing and development, I am what I call a jumper. I start with a rough plan with the objectives/outputs in mind, defining the necessary components to the best of my understanding at the time. Then I move forward from the core AND backward from the outputs making modifications to the design and architecture as needed. This may sound insane, but it's necessary to never lose sight of the objectives AND the constraints.
    4