5 ms·
> Everyone codes, and everyone architects. This will result in an inconsistent mess, most likely. If your architect is a decent programmer himself and has suf
by quonn 12y ago
> Everyone codes, and everyone architects.
This will result in an inconsistent mess, most likely.
If your architect is a decent programmer himself and has sufficient experience, then there is no reason why his design should be thrown away.
- jjm 12y agoIn my professional experience I've met architects that don't code, or even remember how. Very sad.
- ecopoesis 12y agoEven worse, in my experience I've yet to meet an architect who does know how to code.
- jrochkind1 12y agoI agree from my experience, especially with open source, that you need a person (or rarely, a junta) applying architecture. But if that person isn't _also_ one of the coders, getting their hands dirty, their architecture will be no good. Recently someone linked on HN to a study of succesful open source projects, that found that even the most successful ones only had few -- or often one -- person making most of the commits. My interpretation of those findings is that it's representing this state of affairs. Although I think there's probably a way to preserve the benefits of a strong hand on architecture without having that person making all/most of the commits -- but they've got to be making some of them, to ground their plans.
- quonn 12y agoYes, I hinted at that. The architect should also code on the same project. Or at least read the code of that project.
- guard-of-terra 12y ago> This will result in an inconsistent mess It will not, when developers have a habit of sitting together and talking thru the architecture they're going to implement. This, and readiness to throw bad parts away and only let passable ones live.