Skip to main content

Best of Breed

Spikes are one of the best ways to aid the design of software. In some cases spike solutions can open more questions than they solve. The use of a technique known as Best of Breed can assist when this arises.

Rather than producing a single spike, produce several. Either individually or with other developers working on a spike each. Each solution can then be compared and contrasted. The best parts of each solution can then be combined. Best of Breed is named for its likeness to genetics where the best genes win out for future generations as part of the process of evolution.

Example

Spike solution A has an excellent way to handle future requirements due to the open and closed approach taken. Solution B solves the data access problem in an elegant manner. Both solutions have good components. Simply combine the solutions into a single approach. This results in code that contains extensibility and good data access patterns.

Benefits

  • Neither standalone solution would have been as good as this hybrid or best of breed.
  • Multiple developers have intimate knowledge of the code thanks to collective code ownership.
  • Allows experimentation - go wild with multiple solutions trying out techniques or ideas you would not normally experiment with. Safe in the knowledge there is more than one solution to any problem.
  • Provides a learning platform. It's always good to see how and why others solve problems.

Best of Breed provides benefits above and beyond traditional spike solutions. With more than one developer the addition of multiple spikes can be developed in parallel. For individuals the construction of further solutions should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Single developers may prefer to evolve a single spike during various phases.


The term Best of Breed was introduced to myself by Paul Shannon.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Constant Object Anti Pattern

Most constants are used to remove magic numbers or variables that lack context. A classic example would be code littered with the number 7. What does this refer to exactly? If this was replaced with DaysInWeek or similar, much clarity is provided. You can determine that code performing offsets would be adding days, rather than a mysterious number seven.Sadly a common pattern which uses constants is the use of a single constant file or object. The beauty of constants is clarity, and the obvious fact such variables are fixed. When a constant container is used, constants are simply lumped together. These can grow in size and often become a dumping ground for all values within the application.A disadvantage of this pattern is the actual value is hidden. While a friendly variable name is great, there will come a time where you will want to know the actual value. This forces you to navigate, if only to peek at the value within the constant object. A solution is to simple perform a refactor …

Three Steps to Code Quality via TDD

Common complaints and problems that I've both encountered and hear other developers raise when it comes to the practice of Test Driven Development are: Impossible to refactor without all the tests breakingMinor changes require hours of changes to test codeTest setup is huge, slow to write and difficult to understandThe use of test doubles (mocks, stubs and fakes is confusing)Over the next three posts I will demonstrate three easy steps that can resolve the problems above. In turn this will allow developers to gain one of the benefits that TDD promises - the ability to refactor your code mercifully in order to improve code quality.StepsStop Making Everything PublicLimit the Amount of Dependencies you Use A Unit is Not Always a Method or ClassCode quality is a tricky subject and highly subjective, however if you follow the three guidelines above you should have the ability to radically change implementation details and therefore improve code quality when needed.

DRY vs DAMP in Tests

In the previous post I mentioned that duplication in tests is not always bad. Sometimes duplication becomes a problem. Tests can become large or virtually identically excluding a few lines. Changes to these tests can take a while and increase the maintenance overhead. At this point, DRY violations need to be resolved.SolutionsTest HelpersA common solution is to extract common functionality into setup methods or other helper utilities. While this will remove and reduce duplication this can make tests a bit harder to read as the test is now split amongst unrelated components. There is a limit to how useful such extractions can help as each test may need to do something slightly differently.DAMP - Descriptive and Meaningful PhrasesDescriptive and Meaningful Phrases is the alter ego of DRY. DAMP tests often use the builder pattern to construct the System Under Test. This allows calls to be chained in a fluent API style, similar to the Page Object Pattern. Internally the implementation wil…