He's all over the place, and as other commenters have mentioned some of it is a little ridiculous. However, there are a few great kernels. I am guessing that

He's all over the place, and as other commenters have mentioned some of it is a little ridiculous. However, there are a few great kernels. I am guessing that one of the reasons that Test-Driven Development is popular is that it also exposes object interactions during development. This is exactly right. The reason TDD is useful goes right back to the fact that Well Factored Programs Cannot be Understood Statically [0]. Type systems cannot deal well with the fact that programs change, and that different bits of complex systems may not be consistent. Oh my this is exactly right. Most of my work is doing integrations with a variety of APIs. I try to do as much as possible in JavaScript because it's dynamic nature papers over the major issues in nearly every "enterprise" API. I'm very excited about the prospect of pluggable types [1] that he mentions. I challenge you, however, to name a single programming language mechanism that supports change. The first I've ever seen was just yesterday [2], but even that is just a tool attached to a language ecosystem, not a part of the ecosystem itself. I like to think that one day, when we grow up, perhaps we will think of the model as being the source code. I think this is already the case in many circles. For instance, domain-driven design makes it a priority. ...we have difficulty distinguishing real and accidental complexity. This might be the most insightful statement in the article. I'd be intersted in readin gmore about this and how to mitigate the problems. [0]: http://c2.com/ppr/wiki/WikiPagesAboutRefactoring/WellFactoredProgramsCannotBeUnderstoodStatically.html http://c2.com/ppr/wiki/WikiPagesAboutRefactoring/WellFactore... [1]: http://bracha.org/pluggableTypesPosition.pdf http://bracha.org/pluggableTypesPosition.pdf [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8731041 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8731041