From: ian-news@this.is.invalid   
      
   Dave Abrahams wrote:   
   > on Mon Dec 17 2012, Francis Glassborow   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >> The deep problem is the whole concept of patterns as being   
   >> appropriate for use by inexpert/inexperienced programmers. Books on   
   >> patterns should be put on the restricted list, only to be read by   
   >> those who have at least reached journeyman status in programming. Of   
   >> course publishers would not like that because the sales would be   
   >> minuscule :)   
   >   
   > +1.  Even when I was already a reliable and experienced programmer, my   
   > discovery of GoF led me to waste several weeks looking for ways to   
   > apply the patterns to my existing code.  Inevitably the effect was   
   > always going to be decoupling things that didn't need to be decoupled   
   > and adding generality where it wasn't needed.  That led me to distrust   
   > "design patterns" in general.   
   >   
   > I brought this up with Kevlin Henney one day years ago and he   
   > straightened me out by saying that, essentially, you're not *supposed*   
   > to "apply" design patterns; you're just supposed to recognize them in   
   > existing code.  But what use is that?  I'm still not sure.   
   >   
   > Are design patterns really useful, even to the journeyman?   
      
   As a metaphor, certainly.  As a design tool, I don't think so.   
      
   If you haven't read it, "Refactoring to Patterns" by Joshua Kerievsky   
   provides an excellent introduction to how I like to use design patterns:   
   not as a design tool but as a tool for improving existing code.   
      
   --   
   Ian Collins   
      
      
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)