• <ins id="pjuwb"></ins>
    <blockquote id="pjuwb"><pre id="pjuwb"></pre></blockquote>
    <noscript id="pjuwb"></noscript>
          <sup id="pjuwb"><pre id="pjuwb"></pre></sup>
            <dd id="pjuwb"></dd>
            <abbr id="pjuwb"></abbr>

            C++&&Linux

            做自己喜歡的事情

              C++博客 :: 首頁 :: 聯系 :: 聚合  :: 管理
              3 Posts :: 4 Stories :: 1 Comments :: 0 Trackbacks

            常用鏈接

            留言簿(18)

            我參與的團隊

            搜索

            •  

            最新評論

            閱讀排行榜

            評論排行榜

            2014年8月21日 #

            @import url(http://m.shnenglu.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/css/cuteeditor.css); 出售如下二手書:@import url(http://m.shnenglu.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/css/cuteeditor.css);
            《一個操作系統的實現》
            《Photoshop設計寶典》
            《OpenGL編程指南》
            《More Effective C++》
            《Linux系統管理手冊》
            《Imperfect C++》
            《GRE詞匯精選》
            《DSP嵌入式系統開發典型案例》
            《深度探索C++對象模型》
            《Advanced C++》


            聯系QQ:121475490
            posted @ 2014-08-21 07:50 Smile 閱讀(308) | 評論 (0)編輯 收藏

            2011年8月11日 #

            原文地址:

            http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/08/23/readme-driven-development.html


            Readme Driven Development

            23 August 2010 - San Francisco

            I hear a lot of talk these days about TDD and BDD and Extreme Programming and SCRUM and stand up meetings and all kinds of methodologies and techniques for developing better software, but it's all irrelevant unless the software we're building meets the needs of those that are using it. Let me put that another way. A perfect implementation of the wrong specification is worthless. By the same principle a beautifully crafted library with no documentation is also damn near worthless. If your software solves the wrong problem or nobody can figure out how to use it, there's something very bad going on.

            Fine. So how do we solve this problem? It's easier than you think, and it's important enough to warrant its very own paragraph.

            Write your Readme first.

            First. As in, before you write any code or tests or behaviors or stories or ANYTHING. I know, I know, we're programmers, dammit, not tech writers! But that's where you're wrong. Writing a Readme is absolutely essential to writing good software. Until you've written about your software, you have no idea what you'll be coding. Between The Great Backlash Against Waterfall Design and The Supreme Acceptance of Agile Development, something was lost. Don't get me wrong, waterfall design takes things way too far. Huge systems specified in minute detail end up being the WRONG systems specified in minute detail. We were right to strike it down. But what took its place is too far in the other direction. Now we have projects with short, badly written, or entirely missing documentation. Some projects don't even have a Readme!

            This is not acceptable. There must be some middle ground between reams of technical specifications and no specifications at all. And in fact there is. That middle ground is the humble Readme.

            It's important to distinguish Readme Driven Development from Documentation Driven Development. RDD could be considered a subset or limited version of DDD. By restricting your design documentation to a single file that is intended to be read as an introduction to your software, RDD keeps you safe from DDD-turned-waterfall syndrome by punishing you for lengthy or overprecise specification. At the same time, it rewards you for keeping libraries small and modularized. These simple reinforcements go a long way towards driving your project in the right direction without a lot of process to ensure you do the right thing.

            By writing your Readme first you give yourself some pretty significant advantages:

            • Most importantly, you're giving yourself a chance to think through the project without the overhead of having to change code every time you change your mind about how something should be organized or what should be included in the Public API. Remember that feeling when you first started writing automated code tests and realized that you caught all kinds of errors that would have otherwise snuck into your codebase? That's the exact same feeling you'll have if you write the Readme for your project before you write the actual code.

            • As a byproduct of writing a Readme in order to know what you need to implement, you'll have a very nice piece of documentation sitting in front of you. You'll also find that it's much easier to write this document at the beginning of the project when your excitement and motivation are at their highest. Retroactively writing a Readme is an absolute drag, and you're sure to miss all kinds of important details when you do so.

            • If you're working with a team of developers you get even more mileage out of your Readme. If everyone else on the team has access to this information before you've completed the project, then they can confidently start work on other projects that will interface with your code. Without any sort of defined interface, you have to code in serial or face reimplementing large portions of code.

            • It's a lot simpler to have a discussion based on something written down. It's easy to talk endlessly and in circles about a problem if nothing is ever put to text. The simple act of writing down a proposed solution means everyone has a concrete idea that can be argued about and iterated upon.

            Consider the process of writing the Readme for your project as the true act of creation. This is where all your brilliant ideas should be expressed. This document should stand on its own as a testament to your creativity and expressiveness. The Readme should be the single most important document in your codebase; writing it first is the proper thing to do.

            posted @ 2011-08-11 18:20 Smile 閱讀(1491) | 評論 (0)編輯 收藏

            2007年12月10日 #

            ubuntu 7.10下g++的疑問
                裝完ubuntu 7.10后,在它下面寫了一個基本的C++程序,用g++ 4.1編譯后發現了一個令我感到迷惑的地方。如下的程序:
               int main(int argc, char* argv[])
                {
                  std::cout << "hello" << std::endl;
                }
            在g++下沒有報任何錯誤和警告!
            posted @ 2007-12-10 17:30 Smile 閱讀(567) | 評論 (0)編輯 收藏

            色欲久久久天天天综合网精品| 中文字幕精品久久| 人人狠狠综合久久88成人| 久久精品人成免费| 9久久9久久精品| 日本国产精品久久| 久久综合九色综合网站| 国产高潮久久免费观看| 无码人妻少妇久久中文字幕 | 国产精品青草久久久久福利99| 国产精品综合久久第一页| 国内精品伊人久久久久妇| 久久无码人妻一区二区三区| 国产激情久久久久影院小草| 中文精品久久久久人妻不卡| 曰曰摸天天摸人人看久久久| 久久国产色av免费看| 99久久精品这里只有精品 | 久久久久人妻一区精品性色av| 精品久久香蕉国产线看观看亚洲 | 中文字幕一区二区三区久久网站| 久久99精品国产麻豆宅宅| 91超碰碰碰碰久久久久久综合| 无码人妻久久一区二区三区蜜桃| 色综合久久综精品| 久久无码人妻一区二区三区| 亚洲色欲久久久久综合网| 国产巨作麻豆欧美亚洲综合久久| 狠狠色噜噜色狠狠狠综合久久| 精品国产热久久久福利| 91久久婷婷国产综合精品青草| 国产精品久久久久久五月尺| 精品久久久久中文字幕一区| 久久综合综合久久狠狠狠97色88| 久久综合给合久久国产免费| 97精品伊人久久久大香线蕉 | 国产成人精品综合久久久| 久久精品成人欧美大片| 99久久无码一区人妻| 伊人久久大香线焦综合四虎| 51久久夜色精品国产|