RE: Refactoring process model,

You do not refactor, that is change the design, just for the sake of it. You
set out with the goal of improving SOME ility -- why else would you change
your design? The same hold for process refactoring. So, here's a question to
the original poster -- what are you trying to accomplish?

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Adam Sroka
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 12:27 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [refactoring] Refactoring process model,

We refactor to improve the design. We optimize to improve "ilities." These
are separate activities. The end goal is to have the best design that meets
the customers needs.

It is true that a given refactoring may preserve behavior but not
performance (or other qualities.) That's why we write tests for these and
when they fall outside an acceptable threshold we optimize them
aggressively.

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Amir Kolsky <[email protected]> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Well... Refactoring a system means changing its internal structure 
> without changing its behavior. I would guess that for a process with a 
> specified input and output, you can change the internal steps without 
> changing the outcome.
>
> The problem with the definition of refactoring is that what is 
> construed to be the 'behavior of the system' really means the 
> 'functional behavior of the system'. This leaves 'ilities' in an 
> unknown state. Should the performance be the same? The flexibility? 
> The maintainability?
>
> If you would keep the full behavior of the system intact, you can't 
> really do any refactoring. So my guess is that by 'process' 
> refactoring we mean making sure that the outcome is the same but we 
> get better performance, visibility, quality, etc.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On Behalf Of Steven Gordon
> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 10:15 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [refactoring] Refactoring process model,
>
> Would refactoring a model mean that the form and organization of the 
> model is being changed while keeping the meaning of the model unchanged?
>
> If so, I would need some convincing to believe there is much practical 
> value in it.
>
> If not, then I think refactoring would be a very deceptive way to 
> label what is really reworking a model.
>
> SteveG
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:37 AM, aishafds <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Hi
> > Am planning to do a little research on refactoring of business 
> > process models. can you please suggest some ways i can go about...
> >
> > Was thinking of a normalization approach to the models...do you 
> > think this idea can work out ?
> > thanks
> > looking forward to your suggestions
> > Aisha
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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

Yahoo! Groups Links





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

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:
    [email protected] 
    [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/