• (cs) in reply to Spectre

    Err... Except that would be his own blog...

  • (cs)

    “Patchwork” might be misinterpreted. The Manifesto needs another bullet: VIII The Past is Past Test results, bug reports, change requests, and complaints from the field are only relevant for the previous build. Developers need to focus on the next release. Clients are small-minded, stuck in how things have been, while developers create what will become. Fixing the old can only make it adequate. Greatness comes from making the New. Front Ahead means not looking back. --Rank

  • Steve H. (unregistered) in reply to Spectre
    Spectre:
    How deep you fell, copying content from somebody else's blog. Shame, shame.
    I can't tell if you're joking or are dead serious.
  • (cs)

    This reads like Joel on Software.

  • Man 987876980 (unregistered)

    FAD sounds better than XP. At least FAD involves SOME design before you start hacking it as you go along.

  • (cs)

    Sure, my ex-boss was a great proponent of FAD.

    Still, I'm glad hear that he gave up on "this Internet business" and resorted to go back to what he knows (which is Design, incidentally).

  • Man 987876980 (unregistered)

    Many OSS projects could benefit from a FAD consultant as well.

  • Alin (unregistered) in reply to Edward Royce
    Edward Royce:
    Hmmmm.

    Front Ahead Design (FAD) is ok.

    But I'm more comfortable with Never Ahead Design System (NADS).

    The beauty of NADS is that you're never expected to "catch up". You're always going to be behind the curve so it's not a big deal.

    And kick-starting a project in the NADS is something to behold. Preferably from a distance.

    Hilarious!

  • morry (unregistered)

    Meh. It'll pass. Just like disco, pipe smoking and responsible government, it will fade over time into obscurity. Only to be mentioned in passing by history books and Wikipedia. There's a term for things like that, if only I could think of it...

  • (cs)

    Dammit Alex, you barstard. You got me. I got almost to the end before I remembered the date.

    Totally had me going on the Daily WTH thing, too.

    Hats off to you.

  • hc (unregistered) in reply to JimM
    JimM:
    For those who missed the point(TM), I was having a stab at paradigm evangelism in general, not RAD or Agile development in particular (they're just the examples I personally have heard most evangelism of).
    I don't get it. So you tell us that "evangelism" is, even when promoting good things?
    JimM:
    Agile is (essentially) just another buzz paradigm. Your software is as good as your code, not your development paradigm. If you're a bad coder, you will develop as badly in an agile environment as in a FAD one.
    This is where I don't agree. You see, the presumption of agile is, that you are a good developer, but your productivity and quality of work suffers from miscommunication, excessive bureaucracy, ineffective work with user requirements, ineffective testing, etc. That is generally what bring people to agile.
  • hc (unregistered) in reply to hc

    I love not being able to edit my posts.

    The first sentence should read

    So you tell us that "evangelism" is bad, even when promoting good things?

  • The Undroid (unregistered)

    Some of it reminds me of the old P.J. Plauger columns "Tomes for our Times": Algorithms - Data Structures = Assembly Language, Programming Art's Computer, etc.

  • G (unregistered)

    Very funny, April 1st and all ... But someone care to explain the Buenos Aires thing? Did not get it 0_o

  • (cs) in reply to hc
    hc:
    priceless. And also, scarily familiar from some of the RAD / Agile evangelism that's out there.

    You know, I might even learn to be a fan of FAD - it makes a lot of sense! You're coding for the customer, so you do what you can to keep the customer happy. No-one expects software to work properly anymore, so why waste time trying to write software that does work? Write software that looks / acts how the customers expect, than patch functionality later! It makes sense!! BRILLANT!!!

    Yes, it's very similar to agile development...

    No wait, agile actually promotes sound design. It's just you being stupid.

    You are a sad, sad, sad, homunculus. "Sound design?" Definitely not part of the XP prospectus (vide Chrysler et al), and not intrinsic to Agile (whatever the ... help me here, please, Alex, is that Hell, or Heck, or Hhhhhrrrwoorrfgghhtt?)

    What I get from listening to XP, agile, scrum etc proponents is an eery feeling that they don't know what they're doing, but that nonetheless they don't like writing it down, asking questions, or, even worse, using basic communication techniques to explain that it can't be done within the traditional triangle (cheap-fast-correct).

    If you've got 3x5 powerpoint slides to contradict my position, I'd love to see them.

    "Mandatory Fun Day" graphics are good for a start. You can develop them into a Charlie Chaplin film afterwards. Eventually, 3-D color will emerge.

  • Bill (unregistered)

    This is hardly a complete description of the FAD phenomenon. You didn't even mention the new Front-Ahead Interface Language, an extremely powerful modeling/prototyping/implementation language, especially when used with the Front-Ahead Scripting Template library. If your project is at Death's door, FAIL/FAST will pull it through!

  • Demaestro (unregistered)

    Sounds like a more formal version of "extreme programming methodology" or XP

  • (cs) in reply to hc
    hc:
    I love not being able to edit my posts.

    The first sentence should read

    So you tell us that "evangelism" is bad, even when promoting good things?

    Do you disagree?

  • (cs) in reply to Ben
    Ben:
    God, you wish you were funny.
    You obviously haven't read the Book of Job, have you?

    Here's a clue: try being funny yourself. It's not as easy as you'd think. The benefits are babes, drugs, and suicide.

    Well, two out of three ain't bad.

  • (cs) in reply to hc
    hc:
    I love not being able to edit my posts.
    I love people who are unfamiliar with the concept of "proofreading".
  • (cs)

    What's interesting about some of the WTFs we've seen here is both how doing what it takes and not doing what it takes can contribute to problems. How the clueless have blundered ahead. And how the timid have failed to challenge a dysfunctional status quo.

  • ollo (unregistered) in reply to pitchingchris

    FAD = First April Day

  • Stewie (unregistered)

    Yes... Ha Ha... very original, not only did you do an April fool's joke like all the other websites, you also did two in a row. That's kind of old now. I think the moment passed after the first post.

    Any real articles for the day?

  • (cs)

    Hey! I work like that a lot, but without the whole "light" code thing. If I fail my project, it'll be because I have written a comprehensive framework with several layers of facades, interfaces, factories and implementations just to read some keys from the keyboard.

    Now, on a more serious note, every entreprise uses this methodology with very sound results :

    VBA anyone?

    Ok, calling it software development would be a stretch, but VBA development is so much like FAD. It has it all - copy/paste libraries, one layer of code, light code, just what it takes to do what you want, and all that. Yes, when lambda users do the code, it can get ugly.

  • Yoji (unregistered)

    This article makes me so depressed. I live with FAD design every day.

    /cries in the corner.

  • The Truth (unregistered)

    ANYONE WHO DOESN'T USE RATIONAL ROSE FOR EVERYTHING IS UNPROFESSIONAL I USED IT EVEN TO WRITE THIS SO EAT MY SHORTS

  • (cs)

    I've worked on a software project like that.

  • SomeCoder (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    hc:
    priceless. And also, scarily familiar from some of the RAD / Agile evangelism that's out there.

    You know, I might even learn to be a fan of FAD - it makes a lot of sense! You're coding for the customer, so you do what you can to keep the customer happy. No-one expects software to work properly anymore, so why waste time trying to write software that does work? Write software that looks / acts how the customers expect, than patch functionality later! It makes sense!! BRILLANT!!!

    Yes, it's very similar to agile development...

    No wait, agile actually promotes sound design. It's just you being stupid.

    You are a sad, sad, sad, homunculus. "Sound design?" Definitely not part of the XP prospectus (vide Chrysler et al), and not intrinsic to Agile (whatever the ... help me here, please, Alex, is that Hell, or Heck, or Hhhhhrrrwoorrfgghhtt?)

    What I get from listening to XP, agile, scrum etc proponents is an eery feeling that they don't know what they're doing, but that nonetheless they don't like writing it down, asking questions, or, even worse, using basic communication techniques to explain that it can't be done within the traditional triangle (cheap-fast-correct).

    If you've got 3x5 powerpoint slides to contradict my position, I'd love to see them.

    "Mandatory Fun Day" graphics are good for a start. You can develop them into a Charlie Chaplin film afterwards. Eventually, 3-D color will emerge.

    This is true. Agile development doesn't care about sound design, or really, design at all. They want it done. Their ideology is to get something working in the iteration. They don't care how, it just needs to be working.

    Not all practitioners of Agile do this. Some do care about design but the real meat and potatoes of Agile is to get something out of the door in this iteration and to hell with everything else.

  • Chris (unregistered)

    I think people are confusing "build the interface first" and "design the interface first". Certainly in many situations the interface is a big concern to the client and knowing how the employees will use the software is key. BUILDING the interface before anything else, however, is ridiculous. "Deliver a working front-end first" is what the article said, and that would be quite a feat without a backend!

  • Matt (unregistered)

    wonderfull, Alex you're just a genious!!!

    really great, really hecking hilarious!

    for sure the best article i read TODAY :-)

  • iMalc (unregistered)

    I love the way the story goes pregressively furthur and furthur downhill!

  • Mrx (unregistered) in reply to dpm

    I again love people who are wasting their personal time on proofreading.

  • Ken B (unregistered) in reply to The Truth
    The Truth:
    ANYONE WHO DOESN'T USE RATIONAL ROSE FOR EVERYTHING IS UNPROFESSIONAL I USED IT EVEN TO WRITE THIS SO EAT MY SHORTS
    Well, I don't know what the color "rational rose" looks like, but unless it looks very much like black, I think you posted incorrectly.
  • Woohoo (unregistered) in reply to pitchingchris

    He he.

    Incidentally, in german the word "fad" means dull, bland, uninspired, undistinctive, undynamic ...

    Sounds like the definitive adjective for this great new methodology! ;o)

  • coder (unregistered)

    Some good points, but many indications of a lazy developer.

  • Mrx (unregistered) in reply to Porpus
    Porpus:
    Yes, there are coders who take this kind of "just make it work" approach to extremes. But overcompensation (i.e. over-architecting) is far more common. It's also far more fun to mock the over-architects (who really, really take themselves seriously) than it is to mock the under-architects (who really, really want to get out the door at 5PM and don't care if Rockford Lhotka is impressed).

    Wise words! Have to copy-paste them somewhere for safe keeping. :)

    Also noticed this ironic side of architecting and oop design. Can't stand hearing people talk endlessly about problems instead of trying to write program that solves them. I for one use C++-statements to "think" and "design" my ideas. It's amaising how much understanding of a problem trial-and-error-prototyping gives.

  • I'm anonymous too (unregistered) in reply to Anonymously Yours

    Difficult to tell if that reply is sarcastic or not. Disagree with it regarding comments.

    Code should be self-documenting, but if you've written all code without feeling the need for any comments necessary - congratulations...

  • this webcomic is a wtf (unregistered) in reply to Anonymously Yours
    Anonymously Yours:
    I love this. The only thing missing is a condemnation of using comments anywhere in the code. All code should be self-documenting, using an ever-shifting, undocumented variable naming system that is inconsistent between developers, projects, and individual sections of code.

    Comments are for kids in college. scoff Don't even get me started on shop standards. They just slow people down when they should be Learning To Deal instead.

    <REAL PROGRAMMER> if it was hard to write, it should be hard to read </REAL PROGRAMMER>

  • Heck (unregistered) in reply to Spectre
    Spectre:
    How deep you fell, copying content from somebody else's blog. Shame, shame.
    That'd be his own blog.

    I guess this is just in case thedailywth was too subtle for anyone. Check your calendars, people!

  • (cs)
    Alex:
    The customer could care less what’s behind the scenes, so long as it looks good and does what it’s supposed to.
    So, why does the customer care so much about what's behind the scenes? Oh, right, you mean they "couldn't care less". As in, they are at the bottom of their caring ability. As opposed to actually being able to care less.
  • (cs)

    I worked on a software project like that for a now defunct computer manufacturer. This was maybe 30 years ago but some mismanagement techniques are timeless. The project integrated--tried to integrate--three different and incompatible database languages: DL/1, DB2, and ADR's DATACOM. There was a huge COBOL vendor purchased inventory system, maintained by an on-site consultant, and lots of local code. It never worked quite right, it crashed at least weekly and we were using it live. Needless to say, the scope of the project morphed like butter on a hot stove.

    Before the software project, some 5 to 10% of our shipments were DOA on arrival. The sales department was playing fast and loose with SEC regulations (yeah, the government) by not closing out a month's shipments until maybe the 15th of the next month. The software was supposed to FIX our management problems by giving us better control over the process. The software purchase must have been a board level decision, since every department directly involved in manufacturing fought tooth and nail to hold on to their way of doing things.

    Key people, like senior database folk, bailed out and I got assigned to "pick up the slack." One day I'd just had too much of it, so I walked out back, jumped off the loading dock and went home. Oh, I had to call in sick for a while and negotiate a termination, but I was done with that job.

    Please tell me when the next Fadstronaut certification exam is being held.

  • ping floyd (unregistered)

    All I have to say is that the diagram embedded in the article goes against your paradigm. I think you should have drawn it on a napkin and took a picture on a wooden table.

  • HK-47 (unregistered)

    The name is lacking something. It needs more letters, of course. A positive affirmation is added. FYAD: Front (YES!) Ahead Design Now we're getting somewhere. How about: FYADIAF: FYAD In All Functions

  • hc (unregistered) in reply to SomeCoder
    real_aardvark:
    You are a sad, sad, sad, homunculus. "Sound design?" Definitely not part of the XP prospectus (vide Chrysler et al), and not intrinsic to Agile (whatever the ... help me here, please, Alex, is that Hell, or Heck, or Hhhhhrrrwoorrfgghhtt?)
    Please, just do some research. For example Agile manifesto states that continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility.
    SomeCoder:
    This is true. Agile development doesn't care about sound design, or really, design at all. They want it done. Their ideology is to get something working in the iteration. They don't care how, it just needs to be working.

    Not all practitioners of Agile do this. Some do care about design but the real meat and potatoes of Agile is to get something out of the door in this iteration and to hell with everything else.

    You are right that delivering is the one and only goal - as with any other methodology. Things like proper design, coding style, testing, etc. are just means to an end. Implying that agile means no design and free-for-all hacking of code is of course wrong. The stated goal of agile is to deliver at fast and constant pace. You cannot deliver software at constant pace without proper design and architecture.

  • (cs)
    ...and you’ve earned the designation Certified Fadstronaut!
    Looks, to me, like another sticker give-away opportunity!

    This all makes good sense! I nearly soiled my Leisure Suit from the excitement generated while I read this!

  • fersis (unregistered)

    yeah, i live on Buenos Aires! so i can go to the FAD meeting!

    oh ,and we need more lol catz. (Maybe the official banner of FAD could be a lol cat, like 'can i haz teh FAD?')

    cheers and thanks for the april 1 fun. It made me smile.

  • JimM (unregistered)
    LoadsOfPeople:
    hc:
    blah blah blah...
    You're just wrong
    Awww, look. I got my very own troll, and now everyone else is jumping on them ;^( Please guys, don't feed the troll. p.s. Yes, evangelism is bad, regardless of what you are promoting. But when what you are claiming is plain wrong (i.e. agile design means you always get a good software product), it's worse...
  • JimM (unregistered) in reply to hc
    hc:
    JimM:
    Agile is (essentially) just another buzz paradigm. Your software is as good as your code, not your development paradigm. If you're a bad coder, you will develop as badly in an agile environment as in a FAD one.
    This is where I don't agree.
    You don't agree that a bad programmer will always write bad code? Someone should've told Paula Bean's employers...
  • v.dog (unregistered)

    I've loved FAD every since we implemented it at my workplace, everything is so much easier.

    There's just one caveat; it is becoming a constant struggle to get the boss to stop seeing my forearms as disposable.

  • code pioneer (unregistered)

    I LOVE PHP TOO

Leave a comment on “Front-Ahead Design”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article