hergin

I think the problem with this article and their approach will be more visible when super star developers start to leave the company. If they are all the same people from the very beginning, yes, throw lots of practices out of the window because people know the codebase very well. But once they are out, there will be a mountain of tech-debt. They even try to make it testable.

You look like having the misconception #2.

> Misconception 2. You should find a CEO to run the company

At early stages, no brilliant CEOs will agree to that and you don't want to do business with mediocre CEOs.

So the assumption is that the targeted developers work in an environment where business rules are translated into code and they have access to domain experts? They will use your system to develop easier.

By the way, I signed up for beta to try the system.

As far as I understand, this is for developers to develop algorithms, right? If that is the case, aren't the algorithms mature already? Or are we as developers just passing the data to existing algorithms and problem types of your system?

It is a neat idea to separate the semantics and the syntax. However, for some reason, it didn't get enough popularity.

Apache Commons has an SCXML package which parses scxml statechart format (standard) and produces dynamic java objects but this couldn't see the daylight and suspended at version 0.9 in 2015.

I had nice experiences with this separation logic though. It is more flexible and extendable than regular finite state machines. There is parallelism and timeouts built-in the standard and as mentioned in the presentation, it solves a lot of if-else kinda structure without a hassle.

The article just focused on Uncle Bob's asking for "unit tests" in "Tools are not the answer". But I believe Bob just asked a rhetorical question over there. If someone is not writing unit tests at the very first place, he doesn't need to ask any other kind of tests furthermore, which are likely be less and less people raising hands.

Maybe Google Wave arrived too early to the scene. These new generation chat apps all reminds me the features of Wave.

It would be more interesting for GUI based projects. For example a WPF or html/css application. Seeing how it evolves step by step would be nice. Of course I am assuming the repository has logical commits.

I forgot why. Because I like to interact and get answers for my unique questions from the teacher. Not a lot of online classes provide this interaction. Actually most of them are prerecorded videos and stuff.

My main perspective on the issue: If I want to learn a completely new topic, I like it to with a teacher standing in front of me. Otherwise, I can take an online course just to recall some topics and update my outdated information.

I believe much of the problem mentioned in the article is about us not being software engineers but only programmers/coders. If we, as an industry, would have adopted engineering discipline instead of producing systems in light speed by just coding, what we are talking now would be different things.