Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
One of the best ways to keep future bugs out is to maintain a proper "separation of concerns", that is, design the code so that classes and modules have clear, well-defined, and isolated responsibilities and well-understood semantics. The fundamental goal is to write shy code - code that doesn't reveal too much of itself to anyone else and doesn't talk to others any more than is necessary. Shy code keeps to itself, not like that gossipy neighbor who's involved in everyone else's comings and goings. Shy code would never show its "privates" to "friends," as some more promiscuous C++ code might. The authors examine some ways to help us create shy code. Although we are primarily looking at object-oriented examples, the same principles apply to procedural code as well. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2003 | 10.1109/MS.2003.1159022 | Software, IEEE |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
object-oriented programming,program debugging,OO code,enbugging,preventing bugs,semantics,separation of concerns,shy code | Object code,Procedural programming,Programming language,Software engineering,Object-oriented programming,Computer science,Source code,Separation of concerns,Program animation,Code smell,Semantics | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
20 | 1 | 0740-7459 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
4 | 0.43 | 0 |
Authors | ||
2 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andy Hunt | 1 | 94 | 14.51 |
| David Thomas | 2 | 11 | 5.59 |