Re: Ambiguous Refactoring Solution

In article <[email protected]>,
    joshua <[email protected]>  writes:

> I'm not so sure. Some folks I respect a good deal recently encountered
> legacy code that was really poorly designed.  They knew how to write tests
> for it.  Yet they felt that writing such tests would only couple the tests
> to a very poor design.  They decided to refactor first, sans tests, manually
> test that all was ok, then write the tests against the newly refactored.  I
> think that was likely a sensible path to take in that situation.

Which comes back to my earlier expression of queasiness when I
encounter blanket statements.

Refactoring is a software engineering activity.

Like most software engineering activities, refactoring involves the
use of one's informed judgement.

To be axiomatically dogmatic about an activity disengages your
judgement and leads to silly consequences in the code.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
 <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>

      Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/refactoring/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/refactoring/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/