Using KISS with Demos

I recently prototyped a simple application to see how the simplest form of posting and receiving messages using MSMQ worked. The prototype was a simple WinForms application with two buttons - one for post and one for receive - and a rich textbox to log the activity. All of the logic for the process was in the event handlers for the two buttons. There was no MVP, no separation of layers, no unit testing. The whole form file was no longer than maybe 80 lines of code.

I showed the demo to one of my colleagues and he shook his head in disappointment. Being that we have recently paying attention to the craftsmanship movement on DDD, BDD and the like he asked "Where is the MVP? Where are the unit tests?". I proceeded to explain to him that it was all a simple test that I wanted to perform and I didn't want to clutter my code with unnecessary complexity. Besides, the code was very straight forward and did nothing useful other than demonstrate how to post and receive trivial messages using MSMQ. I also pointed out that fact that this code should not be further enhanced or modified to prove something else or worst, morphed into a real application.

My point is: when creating proofs of concept, keep things as simple as required for the goal at hand, even if it means watering down your code and always remember the K.I.S.S principle - Keep It Simple "Silly".

Comments

Derick Bailey said…
Good stuff, Fernando. I'm in 100% agreement. when doing prototypes and other learning activities for code, don't bother with "the right way". Learn first, by getting things done and working. then be willing to throw away that code and re-do it "the right way" in your actual application.
March 18, 2009 at 7:55 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Simple Example of Using Pipes with C#

Image
So I decided to dig into understanding how Asp.net works under the hood, out of curiosity.  In the articles that I found the authors described the architecture in lower level details.  One of the things that caught my eyes was the use of named Pipes as a means of inter-process communications by the architecture.   So I decided to dig into that portion a little bit deeper.  I discovered that the .Net framework has a namespace for named pipes and it's quite easy to use. I intend to demonstrate a small example that I cooked up rather quickly by setting up a named pipe server and then connecting a pipe client to it.  Before I do that, I want to say as a disclaimer that I don't know that this example demonstrates the best way to use pipes.  What it does do is show the most straightforward way to use them.  Also, before you use pipes you should consider using something else like WCF instead if you need well defined interfaces, as using pipes is pretty raw.   Being the type of perso
Read more

Putting Files on the Rackspace File Cloud

Recently, I’ve been playing around with Asp.Net MVC and I (along with some friends) am creating an Asp.Net MVC application that can access files from our website. This means that files must display on the site as well as provide a way to download/upload them. I won’t give away all the details of the project but I will say this: Sharing photos is one of the driving forces for our project.  The files are only image type files( jpg, etc) The files must be uploaded by the users and stored somewhere within our system.  We don’t necessarily know at this time how much storage space we need but we think that we will need a little at first but possibly a lot more down the road. This means that the storage of these files must be scalable. The uploading of files must be controlled by our system.  Right off the bat we started our application and were uploading files to the web server with no problem.  We only did it this way to kind of prove our system model. We were just basically writing
Read more

Why I Hate Regular Expressions

I have a love-hate relationship with regular expressions.  I admire their power yet I hate the pain and agony they have caused on more than one occasion. Just recently one of my colleagues used a regular expression for validating passwords. It seems pretty fair to use regular expressions for validating character sequence patterns. After all it seems they were created exactly for that.  However when regular expressions fail they fail hard.  What I mean by that is that they usually fail in the production environment. In case you are wondering what a regular expression is take a look at the wikipedia explanation of regular expressions . So we go live and all of a sudden new users can't be created because the regular expression says that the password is not valid due to one of the complexity rules.  But how?  The regular expression passed all the unit tests.  In fact the application works fine in our development and test deployment.  So what happened? The validation works fine unti
Read more