#SWAMP ATTACK PIANO ANDROID#
#SWAMP ATTACK PIANO SOFTWARE#
#SWAMP ATTACK PIANO CODE#

However, from the organization's point of view, it might jeopardize the business in terms of the rapid change requirement to what’s available today.

#SWAMP ATTACK PIANO CODE#

That’s the best from a technical point of view, leaving no legacy code to retain.

#SWAMP ATTACK PIANO SOFTWARE#

One way is to scrap and re-write the entire software from the ground up using the newest technology stack. But it’s pragmatic to do what’s appropriate for the current situation.įor instance, an organization has a legacy code base that is still serving the business. It’s important to build and ship quality code that is scalable and maintainable. Sometimes, we as developers think the business revolves around coding. “Steve (Jobs) didn’t ever code” - Steve Wozniak Go for what’s better, or look for a compromise of what’s good enough. “Oh, we have a bug! But we also have a feature to deliver! Which should I work on first?” “Should we use Java or Kotlin? We have lots of developers already familiar with Java, but Kotlin is the next popular programming language to attract talents.” “Should we build this feature or that? Perhaps we should have both, but then that will increase development time and complicate testing.” “I can’t tell you the the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone” - Ed Sheeran So, instead of beating ourselves to produce what we think it’s ideal, let’s leverage what’s possible currently, and ship the product first in a good enough status.Īs we move to the following iteration, we learn, improve and evolve along with the technology trend. Even if the technology does have the capability, we might not have learned it all to fully harvest it. In software development, there’s almost no way to build software that can surpass its provided technology. Newer language, architecture patterns, frameworks, tools continue to sprout.

#SWAMP ATTACK PIANO ANDROID#

Hardware architected to last Software architected to change Change is the only thing that last.īeing in Android Development for about 8 years, I would say the way we do Android development changes every 2 years. Therefore, it is important to know when we have good enough testing for our software release.īesides having a way to test optimally, let’s also have a plan of Reactive Quality Assurance. While having a quality product is important, and having solid test coverage is vital to ensure sustainable software development, there’s no way one can guarantee a bugless software release.Įven if we have a QA process, there’s no way for one to test until there’s no more bug. There’s a saying “There are two ways to write error-free programs only the third works.” ( source). “If debugging is the process of removing software bugs, then programming must be the process of putting them in.” ― Edsger W. For software, the best architect is how easily it can be re-architected. Lesson learned, do it good enough for the current iteration, and be ready for change. What we architectured might need to change in the next iteration. Image from the author in Another View of Agile Development.Īssuming, if we have architected solidly for the end goal assuming the requirement won’t change, often we will be disappointed. Unfortunately, commonly, after delivering the first iteration, the product owner came back to us stating the market has changed, we need to diverge our plan to the new needs. We can plan and architect it with the final product in mind, while we deliver the first iteration to our user.

We may have a complete road map of the software we wanted to build. “People don’t know what they want until you show it to them.” - Steve Jobs We can either improve them in the next iteration or maybe it might change in the future, which leads to the next point. It might have some deficiencies and limitations. Why not just settle for anything that just works for the current scope, and move on. I have seen countless debates on arguing why the other approach is not ideal etc, one can give countless “what-if” scenario that never happens. The bigger the scope of the project, the more architecture pattern we can achieve it possibly, not to mention the way we code.Įach approach has its pros and cons, and depending on the situation, it differs. In programming, we have literally countless ways of achieving what we intend. “Code is never ‘perfect.’ Code is only ever ‘good enough.’” - Matthew Jones However, as I journey through software development, I realize striving for perfection does us more harm than good. In school, if we score 90%, sometimes we are asked, why we fail to get the last 10%.Ĭoming into software development, at times, we carry such a mentality along. Every note, every touch, has to be as elegant as the original composer. When learning piano, we are asked to strive for perfection.

Swamp attack piano