there is no "ground" in software development

Okay, maybe the "software is like construction" metaphor refers to something else. What happened next? Well, after months of waiting, some guys showed up and dug trenches in the road. They laid some pipes and then covered it back up with gravel and asphalt. Meanwhile, a big trench was dug in the dirt and concrete walls were poured on each side. Some pipes were put in the middle and the whole thing was covered up with gravel.

A metaphor-loving "architect" might point at this and say, "Yes! See, that shows how important a proper foundation is!" I don't get it. To me, it says, "if you're going to put something in the ground, dig a hole to put it in." But... it doesn't take a genius to realize this... there is no "ground" in software development. What would it even mean to "dig a hole" in a piece of software?

(Thanks to object

Cool, ain't it?

Kind of discovery, actually. There is no gravitation in software, why do we need a foundation? More, I know a certain very large software which, provided that good set of unittests regularly checks all the crap thrown in by developers, can sustain major changes in the "background", "foundation" software, and users do not notice anything.

The whole institute of architects, senior architects, etc. Do you think the guy that invented BitTorrent, or the other guy that invented AJAX, or the other guy that invented Ruby, or the other guy that invented Rails, that any of them is an architect? Do you think Neal or Josh are architects? Was Dijkstra an architect? Only the moments it was required, not before and not after.

"After the Great Hole Digging Experience, there was more waiting. Then, just this week, a bunch more people showed up. They built the frame of each wall on the ground, then levered it up to form the walls of the building. Then they nailed boards across the tops of the walls to form the frame of the ceiling. Today--yep, they were working on a Saturday--they added plywood or something similar to the frame to form solid walls and ceiling.

Again, I just don't see the comparison. What does software development have to learn from framing a house? Do we build our pieces of our software on the ground, then lever it up to form walls? Do we nail plywood to the frame to keep out the wind and rain?"

"helper" class is an antipattern

It's obvious.

DHS and Mao's Red Book story

Here's the guy that confirms the story: http://brianglynwilliams.com/

". The incident with our Univ. of Massachusetts history student happened several weeks ago, I was asked to comment on President Bush's sweeping surveillance activities only yesterday. I cited this incident as an example of the White House policies' very real applications and how they trickle down to the university level. My description of the incident was in response to an inquiry from a reporter at the Standard Times, New Bedford who called requesting a commentary and I thought it was appropriate. B. There are several key sections omitted in the version here in the USA of the Little Red Book and we are proud of our student trying to search out the original. This is exactly the sort of primary document research that makes for good history!" - that's from slashdot.

But check out his web site! I think he is a great guy.

so-called object-oriented databases

What do you store there? How come relational is not enough? When you say you store "objects", do you mean you store functionality as well? Do inheritance, polymorphism, incapsulation, all in a database? What's the point of having incapsulation in a database?

You know what. I'm inclined now to think that "object-oriented databases" belong to pseudo-science. Any objections?